Announcement

Collapse

Updated Baseball Fever Policy

Baseball Fever Policy

I. Purpose of this announcement:

This announcement describes the policies pertaining to the operation of Baseball Fever.

Baseball Fever is a moderated baseball message board which encourages and facilitates research and information exchange among fans of our national pastime. The intent of the Baseball Fever Policy is to ensure that Baseball Fever remains an extremely high quality, extremely low "noise" environment.

Baseball Fever is administrated by three principal administrators:
webmaster - Baseball Fever Owner
The Commissioner - Baseball Fever Administrator
Macker - Baseball Fever Administrator

And a group of forum specific super moderators. The role of the moderator is to keep Baseball Fever smoothly and to screen posts for compliance with our policy. The moderators are ALL volunteer positions, so please be patient and understanding of any delays you might experience in correspondence.

II. Comments about our policy:

Any suggestions on this policy may be made directly to the webmaster.

III. Acknowledgments:

This document was based on a similar policy used by SABR.

IV. Requirements for participation on Baseball Fever:

Participation on Baseball Fever is available to all baseball fans with a valid email address, as verified by the forum's automated system, which then in turn creates a single validated account. Multiple accounts by a single user are prohibited.

By registering, you agree to adhere to the policies outlined in this document and to conduct yourself accordingly. Abuse of the forum, by repeated failure to abide by these policies, will result in your access being blocked to the forum entirely.

V. Baseball Fever Netiquette:

Participants at Baseball Fever are required to adhere to these principles, which are outlined in this section.
a. All posts to Baseball Fever should be written in clear, concise English, with proper grammar and accurate spelling. The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum; when abbreviation is necessary, they should be either well-known (such as etc.), or explained on their first use in your post.

b. Conciseness is a key attribute of a good post.

c. Quote only the portion of a post to which you are responding.

d. Standard capitalization and punctuation make a large difference in the readability of a post. TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS is considered to be "shouting"; it is a good practice to limit use of all capitals to words which you wish to emphasize.

e. It is our policy NOT to transmit any defamatory or illegal materials.

f. Personal attacks of any type against Baseball Fever readers will not be tolerated. In these instances the post will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the personal attack via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue personal attacks will be banned from the site.

g. It is important to remember that many contextual clues available in face-to-face discussion, such as tone of voice and facial expression, are lost in the electronic forum. As a poster, try to be alert for phrasing that might be misinterpreted by your audience to be offensive; as a reader, remember to give the benefit of the doubt and not to take umbrage too easily. There are many instances in which a particular choice of words or phrasing can come across as being a personal attack where none was intended.

h. The netiquette described above (a-g) often uses the term "posts", but applies equally to Private Messages.

VI. Baseball Fever User Signature Policy

A signature is a piece of text that some members may care to have inserted at the end of ALL of their posts, a little like the closing of a letter. You can set and / or change your signature by editing your profile in the UserCP. Since it is visible on ALL your posts, the following policy must be adhered to:

Signature Composition
Font size limit: No larger than size 2 (This policy is a size 2)
Style: Bold and italics are permissible
Character limit: No more than 500 total characters
Lines: No more than 4 lines
Colors: Most colors are permissible, but those which are hard to discern against the gray background (yellow, white, pale gray) should be avoided
Images/Graphics: Allowed, but nothing larger than 20k and Content rules must be followed

Signature Content
No advertising is permitted
Nothing political or religious
Nothing obscene, vulgar, defamatory or derogatory
Links to personal blogs/websites are permissible - with the webmaster's written consent
A Link to your Baseball Fever Blog does not require written consent and is recommended
Quotes must be attributed. Non-baseball quotes are permissible as long as they are not religious or political

Please adhere to these rules when you create your signature. Failure to do so will result in a request to comply by a moderator. If you do not comply within a reasonable amount of time, the signature will be removed and / or edited by an Administrator. Baseball Fever reserves the right to edit and / or remove any or all of your signature line at any time without contacting the account holder.

VII. Appropriate and inappropriate topics for Baseball Fever:

Most concisely, the test for whether a post is appropriate for Baseball Fever is: "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?" This post can be direct or indirect: posing a question, asking for assistance, providing raw data or citations, or discussing and constructively critiquing existing posts. In general, a broad interpretation of "baseball related" is used.

Baseball Fever is not a promotional environment. Advertising of products, web sites, etc., whether for profit or not-for-profit, is not permitted. At the webmaster's discretion, brief one-time announcements for products or services of legitimate baseball interest and usefulness may be allowed. If advertising is posted to the site it will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the post via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue advertising will be banned from the site. If the advertising is spam-related, pornography-based, or a "visit-my-site" type post / private message, no warning at all will be provided, and the member will be banned immediately without a warning.

It is considered appropriate to post a URL to a page which specifically and directly answers a question posted on the list (for example, it would be permissible to post a link to a page containing home-road splits, even on a site which has advertising or other commercial content; however, it would not be appropriate to post the URL of the main page of the site). The site reserves the right to limit the frequency of such announcements by any individual or group.

In keeping with our test for a proper topic, posting to Baseball Fever should be treated as if you truly do care. This includes posting information that is, to the best of your knowledge, complete and accurate at the time you post. Any errors or ambiguities you catch later should be acknowledged and corrected in the thread, since Baseball Fever is sometimes considered to be a valuable reference for research information.

VIII. Role of the moderator:

When a post is submitted to Baseball Fever, it is forwarded by the server automatically and seen immediately. The moderator may:
a. Leave the thread exactly like it was submitted. This is the case 95% of the time.

b. Immediately delete the thread as inappropriate for Baseball Fever. Examples include advertising, personal attacks, or spam. This is the case 1% of the time.

c. Move the thread. If a member makes a post about the Marlins in the Yankees forum it will be moved to the appropriate forum. This is the case 3% of the time.

d. Edit the message due to an inappropriate item. This is the case 1% of the time. There have been new users who will make a wonderful post, then add to their signature line (where your name / handle appears) a tagline that is a pure advertisement. This tagline will be removed, a note will be left in the message so he/she is aware of the edit, and personal contact will be made to the poster telling them what has been edited and what actions need to be taken to prevent further edits.

The moderators perform no checks on posts to verify factual or logical accuracy. While he/she may point out gross errors in factual data in replies to the thread, the moderator does not act as an "accuracy" editor. Also moderation is not a vehicle for censorship of individuals and/or opinions, and the moderator's decisions should not be taken personally.

IX. Legal aspects of participation in Baseball Fever:

By submitting a post to Baseball Fever, you grant Baseball Fever permission to distribute your message to the forum. Other rights pertaining to the post remain with the ORIGINAL author, and you may not redistribute or retransmit any posts by any others, in whole or in part, without the express consent of the original author.

The messages appearing on Baseball Fever contain the opinions and views of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of Baseball Fever, or of the Baseball Almanac family of sites.

Sincerely,

Sean Holtz, Webmaster of Baseball Almanac & Baseball Fever
www.baseball-almanac.com | www.baseball-fever.com
"Baseball Almanac: Sharing Baseball. Sharing History."
See more
See less

BBF Post of the Day

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by RuthMayBond View Post
    You're the one who put it in quotes, not me
    Toche RMB!

    I put "defense" in quotes because no one has yet defined for me what catcher "defense" really is.
    Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Honus Wagner Rules View Post
      Toche RMB!

      I put "defense" in quotes because no one has yet defined for me what catcher "defense" really is.
      catch-er de-fense [kach-er] [dee-fens] - noun.
      defn. - Mike Piazza doesn't know the definition either

      If you don't know what it is, how do you know Piazza was doing it?
      Mythical SF Chronicle scouting report: "That Jeff runs like a deer. Unfortunately, he also hits AND throws like one." I am Venus DeMilo - NO ARM! I can play like a big leaguer, I can field like Luzinski, run like Lombardi. The secret to managing is keeping the ones who hate you away from the undecided ones. I am a triumph of quantity over quality. I'm almost useful, every village needs an idiot.
      Good traders: MadHatter(2), BoofBonser26, StormSurge

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by RuthMayBond View Post
        catch-er de-fense [kach-er] [dee-fens] - noun.
        defn. - Mike Piazza doesn't know the definition either

        If you don't know what it is, how do you know Piazza was doing it?
        I have my own ideas of what catcher defense can be defined as. But I ask the question to see whether others really have a well thought out definition of their own. At the very least I have yet to see a generally agreed upon description of what good catcher's defense entails. The whole "Piazza has awful defense" meme is always reduced to his poor throwing arm.

        "Pizza's throwing arm sucked! Therefore Piazza's entire defense sucked!"

        Do other people really reduce catcher's defense to just throwing out runners? I find that odd.
        Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 11-29-2010, 11:59 AM.
        Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Honus Wagner Rules View Post
          I have my own ideas of what catcher defense can be defined as. But I ask the question to see whether others really have a well thought out definition of their own. At the very least I have yet to see a generally agreed upon description of what good catcher's defense entails. The whole "Piazza has awful defense" meme is always reduced to his poor throwing arm.

          "Pizza's throwing arm sucked! Therefore Piazza's defense sucked!"

          Do other people really reduce catcher's defense to just throwing out runners? I find that odd.
          willshad has a good definition, I'm just not sure how he proves that Piazza did it. Perhaps his pitching staffs whose homes were Shea and Dodger Stadium kinda helped them give up not many runs?
          Mythical SF Chronicle scouting report: "That Jeff runs like a deer. Unfortunately, he also hits AND throws like one." I am Venus DeMilo - NO ARM! I can play like a big leaguer, I can field like Luzinski, run like Lombardi. The secret to managing is keeping the ones who hate you away from the undecided ones. I am a triumph of quantity over quality. I'm almost useful, every village needs an idiot.
          Good traders: MadHatter(2), BoofBonser26, StormSurge

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by RuthMayBond View Post
            willshad has a good definition, I'm just not sure how he proves that Piazza did it. Perhaps his pitching staffs whose homes were Shea and Dodger Stadium kinda helped them give up not many runs?
            The things that willshad mentioned (" He could field the position well, handled pitchers, called games, did everything else a catcher needs to do") can at least be studied by going to the game film and scouting reports to see how adept Pizza was at other aspects of defense. We can study comments by the pitchers that Piazza caught to see how they viewed Pizza in terms of calling a game and how good or poor Pizza was at helping pitchers get out of jams. From the polls I have seen Pizza takes such a massive hit on defense that he gets consistently rated behind all the other all-time catchers. In terms of just hitting Piazza absolutely destroys all the other all-time catchers. It's not even close. For 10 seasons Pizza hit like a HoF first baseman. From 1993-2002 he averaged .322/.389/.569, 154 OPS+. That's basically Johnny Mize in terms of hitting. Now if Pizza's other defensive skills were poor along with his throwing then rating Pizza behind Bench, Berra, Cochrane, etc. is probably correct. But if Pizza's other defensive skills were good or great then I think Pizza is getting short changed in the catcher polls IMO.
            Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 11-29-2010, 12:17 PM.
            Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

            Comment


            • #96
              Good post from SHOELESSJOE3. I like cheering ofr the Rays because of their success despite being a poor team that doesn't draw many fans. If they recent the 2011 postseaons i will adopt them as my team to cheer for.

              Originally posted by Mr. Laser Beam View Post
              A new stadium sure as hell can't *hurt*. It can never make the attendance go down - only up. So it can never hurt to try.
              Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
              How will it help after the novelty wears off and attendance goes back down, all those millions spent for nothing.
              Lets try it again.....Your tied for the wild card spot....two games left in the season...the Yankees are in town, and you draw 19,000. The interest is not there.
              Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

              Comment


              • #97
                In response to the White Sox hiring Robin Ventura as their new manager.

                Originally posted by Blue387 View Post
                I think Kenny Williams just chose the first man who walked past his office.
                Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                Comment


                • #98
                  I think at least three of us in the "ESPN.com" thread have loved this one from Blackout:

                  Originally posted by Blackout View Post
                  "It's may 5th...Yankees play the Sawx but first lets go over to Mel Kiper and Todd McShay for a Miller Light cold-hard-facts and break down the St. Louis Rams 5th and 6th round draftpicks"

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    willshad with an astute observation.

                    Originally posted by willshad View Post
                    Raines, along with most of the other late 80s stars, really suffered from the influx of talent that emerged in the early to mid 90s. Guys like Raines, Clark, Canseco, Mcgriff, Murphy, Ripken, Eric Davis, Strawberry, Gwynn, Mattingly, Boggs, and to a lesser degree Puckett and Henderson, all started to decline at the start of the decade. Some of them declined steeper and/or more rapidly than the others, but all of their declines were seen as being steeper due to the great numbers that other players were putting up. As a result, their star faded, and they needed to reach milestones that assured them of the hall, in order to be elected. Puckett is the only one who made the HOF without reaching 3000 hits.
                    Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                    Comment


                    • A retro POTD.


                      Originally posted by Brad Harris View Post
                      Of course Clark isn't as good as McCovey. But he was better than Garvey.

                      Garvey had 2,599 hits, 272 home runs, 1,308 RBI, 479 BB and 83 SB. His BA/OBP/SLG was .294/.329/.446 and he accumulated 3,941 total bases in his career. His career numbers are as much a product of his longevity (19 seasons, 9,466 plate appearances) as they are his ability. He made 6,672 outs in those 9,466 plate appearances, creating just 1,307 runs (or 5.29 per 27 outs).

                      Garvey's batting average was 15% better than league average, his OBP just 2% better and his slugging 19% better. Garvey's runs created represented 163 over league average, but only 57 above the average for 1Bmen in his era. Garvey's secondary average was 8% below the league average.

                      Garvey accumulated 279 win shares in 19 seasons (14.7 per). However, it was really from 1974-80, a period of just 7 years, that Garvey performed at an "all star" level. The other 12 years of his career never saw a seasonal win share value over 17. During those 7 "peak" years, Garvey averaged 24 win shares per year (as opposed to the 9.25 he averaged throughout all those other seasons.) Garvey managed "just" a 116 OPS+ in almost 10,000 plate appearances. A terrible level for a post-1920 first baseman.

                      Garvey's hardware is more a testament to his popularity, not his greatness.

                      Clark had 2,176 hits, 284 home runs, 1,205 RBI, 937 BB and 67 SB. His BA/OBP/SLG was .303/.384/.497 and he accumulated 3,562 total bases in his career. His career numbers were accumulated in spite of serious injury in mid-career. Clark nevertheless saw 8,283 plate appearances, making 5,259 outs and creating 1,369 runs (or 7.03 per 27 outs).

                      Clark's batting average was 16% better than league average, his OBP 16% better and his slugging 24% better. Clark's runs created represented 473 over league average, 294 above the average for 1Bmen in his era. His secondary average was 30% better than league average.

                      Clark earned 331 win shares in 15 seasons (22.1 per). However, it was really from 1987-92, a period of just 6 years, that Clark performed at an MVP-caliber level. During those years, Clark averaged 32.2 win shares per season, leading the National League in 1989 (when he should have won the MVP Award). The other 9 years of his career were productive, though certainly not at the same level. Clark averaged 15.3 win shares per season outside his peak years. Furthermore, the end of Clark's peak seasons correspond with the elbow injuries Clark suffered in 1992-93, robbing him of his power.

                      Clark finished his career with an outstanding 138 OPS+. Among first basemen with at least 8,000 PA (of whom there are 41), Clark's 138 OPS+ ranks #7 all-time, behind only Gehrig, Foxx, Thomas, Connor, Bagwell and McCovey.

                      Clark was a 6-time all-star and finished among the top 5 in MVP voting four times from 1987-91 (compared to Garvey who finished in the top 5 only twice.)

                      Clark was as good a post-season competitor as Garvey. As good a fielder. And a much better hitter. Clark had a much bigger prime and more career value, despite playing 4 fewer seasons and playing the second-half of his career in a diminished capacity (versus Garvey who simply aged over time.)

                      One thing I often see mentioned in regards to Garvey's candidacy is his string of 200-hit seasons. In point of fact, Garvey only led the league in hits twice during those seasons. The ability to collect 200 (or near 200) hits on a regular basis is certainly a valuable one, but reaching that "magic" number is the product of ability and opportunity. Garvey led the league in games played and at bats several times each, facilitating his run at those 200-hit seasons.

                      Garvey's 2599 career hits, moreover were 462 over the league average. Clark's 2,176 hits were 436 hits above league average. A discrepancy of just 26 hits. Using ratios to compare their career hits to league average, Clark comes out on top, 25% above league average to Garvey, 22% above league average. Another way to look at it? Garvey collected 137 hits per season played while Clark collected 145 hits per season played. As a "hit machine" Garvey was more like Mark Grace than Pete Rose.

                      In fact, I can't see anything about Garvey's career that doesn't point directly to Mark Grace without the awards and pageantry. Clark, on the other hand, is like a modern (but better) George Sisler.
                      Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                      Comment


                      • A retro POTD from Brett in 2007.

                        I had started a thread where I claimed that Rickey Henderson's 1982 season was mediocre at best and that is overrated because of the 130 stolen bases, but it wasn't a really a good season because he got caught so many times (I've learned a lot since then).

                        Here was Brett's reply:

                        I meant to post this last night, but the net was down here.

                        Let's analyze.
                        First, his on-base% was .398 and his relative on-base% was 1.236.
                        Evans was first at .402 but only had a relative ob% of 1.196.
                        Harrah was next at .398 but also lower in relative OB% at 1.213.
                        And looking down the list, he lead all players in relative OB% which has to count for something.

                        Second, his OB% was walk heavy-yes, but this also means that his very good OB% took place over more plate appearances than his below average slugging%. His OB% was over 656 plate appearances while his slugging was only over 536 at bats meaning that his OB% should probably be weighted by that proportion when making evaluations. Because of this, walk heavy OB% are not worse than hit heavy OB% for players who have below average slugging percentages. (see what I'm saying?)

                        Third, if you mess around with run expectancies just slightly, you can come up with very different net values for steals and CS.

                        Basically, excluding the added cost of making outs, a steal is worth about as much as the loss of a base-runner from first base.

                        Different evaluations may put a steal of second at as high as .25 runs and as low as .19 runs and an eliminated runner at as low as -.25 runs and as high as -.39 runs.

                        An out, in his run scoring environment would also be about -.18 and if one uses a higher run scoring environment it might go as high as -.22 which is not accurate in this case.

                        So using the most favorable scenario, his 130 steals were worth +32.5 and his CS and outs about -18 for a net of 14 runs. Also 14 runs in that run scoring environment would be equivalent to over 4 games worth of offense. 12-15 games worth of offense above replacement would be a top MVP contender season.

                        Using the worst case scenario, his 130 steals were worth only about 24.7 runs (though your numbers are a little lower) and his 42 CS about -23.9 for a net of merely +.8 runs.

                        Another way to look at it is that a SB is almost as valuable as turing a single into a double, and a CS is about the same as eliminating a walk, and adding an out. A SB is actually probably worth almost exactly the same as .7 extra bases with an average breakdown of double, triples and home-runs. A CS is so close to equal to eliminating a walk and adding an out that I will leave it at that.

                        So if we want to modify his on-base and slugging percentages to include his base stealing numbers he would have 205 TBs + 91 equivalent due to steal or 296. We would also remove 42 walks giving him 74, and add 42 outs giving him 435.

                        This would give him effective slugging percentage of .512 and an effective on base% of .332 (though you could discredit the walk at a different rate from slugging instead). This would mean that his effective OPS+ would be 133, but could be as low as 127 if you dock him differently from different components of OBP and SLG%.

                        So I think its safe to say that it was along the lines of a straight up 127-133 OPS+ season which, for a corner outfielder who was probably a little above average would be more than mediocre but fairly far from MVP caliber though:

                        A good base-stealer would have, in theory, a better likelyhood of producing more leveraged value stolen bases due to situations, and we can't discount that he had good speed on the bases which didn't show up in the regular stat line (he only had 5 GIDP). We also can't discount his specific disruption factor on the bases.


                        Anyway in post script

                        I would place a SB at about .25 runs and a CS in his era at about -.53 for the loss of baserunner and the out. A loss of baserunner can't be more than equivalent to a walk which is about .36, and an out cuts out the average production of a typical hitter. If you use bases, a plate appearance is worth about .36, or about .18 runs, but if you look at the runs per plate appearance in the league, it was only about 4.3/25.5 or about .17, so I think that an out is inappropriately docked in that era. An out only costed .17 runs and that is a fact. If the run expectancy is off, it is off.

                        His steals and CS, in raw terms only were probably worth 10 runs, or 2.4 games worth of offense, and again that is significant.

                        Put most simply, it would be about the same as turning 10 singles into home runs. That would give him again an estimated 133 OPS+.

                        IT WAS PROBABLY VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL IN VALUE TO ANDRE DAWSON'S '87 SEASON.

                        Comparable to Don Mattingingly in '88 and '89 (even if you discount Henderson's speed when not running).

                        About equal to the value that Pete Rose averaged for the '70s in which he was voted player of the decade.

                        Better than Jim Rice in '83 when GIDP are factored in and much better than Rice in '75 when he was runner up MVP.

                        About equal to David Ortiz in '04.

                        About equal to Griffey in 2000.

                        Those are the ones that it is safe to say that for.

                        MVP-NO

                        STAR-YES, solid

                        MEDIOCRE-if you mean mediocre among seasons by hall of famers yes, its probably a straight down the line average season among all seasons produced by hall of fame caliber players.
                        Last edited by GiambiJuice; 03-27-2012, 11:23 AM.
                        My top 10 players:

                        1. Babe Ruth
                        2. Barry Bonds
                        3. Ty Cobb
                        4. Ted Williams
                        5. Willie Mays
                        6. Alex Rodriguez
                        7. Hank Aaron
                        8. Honus Wagner
                        9. Lou Gehrig
                        10. Mickey Mantle

                        Comment


                        • Brett is one sharp cookie.
                          Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                          Comment


                          • White Knight with a classic BBF response!


                            Originally posted by Seattle1 View Post
                            I voted for Griffey in this pole.


                            Originally posted by White Knight View Post
                            Of course you did, he played for Seattle. You would vote for Ichiro over Ruth.
                            Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                            Comment


                            • One of the funniest BBF posts in a long time! Imapotato is responding to how Babe Ruth would do in today's game.

                              Originally posted by Imapotato View Post
                              .000/.000/.000

                              If he ever made it, he would be a pitcher in the AL

                              But they would have messed with his mechanics kept him to strict pitch counts and Babe would have spent his signing bonus money on women and beer
                              Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 06-20-2012, 05:06 PM.
                              Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                              Comment


                              • willshad made a funny!

                                Originally posted by Blackout View Post
                                if Alex Rodriguez gets 3,000 hits where does that rank him all time?
                                Originally posted by willshad View Post
                                at number 28...tied with Clemente.
                                Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X