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

Future Starting Pitchers in the HOF

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by Toledo Inquisition View Post




    There's a pretty big difference between Mark Buerhle (214 Wins, 3283 innings) and Cole Hamels (149 Wins, 2414 innings so far). Willshad, I'd say Mark had a pretty long career. He had 30+ starts for 15 straight years, and he was 4 outs from having 15 straight years of 200+ innings.

    I think the only things keeping Mark out are that he has a very high raw ERA (thanks to 2000's hitting and Comiskey Park) and that he didn't have a couple huge years, just 15 solid ones back to back.

    For people who like the small things, Mark was never injured, well liked by his teammates, was a post season hero, threw two no hitters (including a perfect game), had a terrific and wicked pickoff move, and may have been the best fielding pitcher ever.
    They are the same type of pitcher to me..solid, reliable; the type I would want as my number two starter, but not really my ace. There is really no precedent for this type of guy to be in the HOF, except in cases like Don Sutton where they had extremely long careers. Maybe the standards for IP should change with the new use of bullpens. But....to me, lesser innings should equal more dominance, no? Isn't that the whole point of using the bullpen more, so that the starter avoids fatigue and seeing the same batter multiple times?

    If a guy has 200 wins and 2500 IP I certainly expect more dominance out of him than the guy who has 275 wins and 3500 IP.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Bothrops Atrox View Post

      Most people - saber-friendly, traditionalist, and BBWAA alike have Smoltz WELL into the HOF.

      The reality here is - you just have a much smaller Hall than everyone else. And like you - a lot of people are going to be very slow accepting modern pitchers with fewer wins and fewer IP as HOFers.
      I don't think the BBWAA has a much bigger HOF than I do. They failed to elect Mussina, Schilling, Brown, all of whom I would say are very close (Mussina is a guy that this site has convinced me is a HOFer). They failed to elect Saberhagen and Cone, who are probably the best matches for the guys we are talking about here. Tim Hudson will probably be one and done. I think Smoltz would have a very hard time getting in if he wasn't part of legendary Braves' teams.

      I just feel it's a safer bet to keep the HOF more exclusive than more inclusive. it should be for the greats, not for every guy who had a few good years, or who had 55 WAR or more.

      I would say, with less than 3000 IP, an ERA+ in the high 120s would be a starting point for serious consideration. it's hard to call a guy with 2500 IP and a 123 ERA (Greinke)+ a HOFer, when Schilling is out, with 3200 IP and a 127 ERA+. along with legendary post season numbers.
      Last edited by willshad; 05-16-2018, 01:38 PM.

      Comment


      • #63
        Yes, but if everyone is doing the same thing with the bullpen then how can I put it "a high tide lifts all the boats." or something like that. Also, relievers generally have better rate stats, so that would make it a bit harder to "dominate" v. league averages.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by willshad View Post

          I don't think the BBWAA has a much bigger HOF than I do. They failed to elect Mussina, Schilling, Brown, all of whom I would say are very close (Mussina is a guy that this site has convinced me is a HOFer). They failed to elect Saberhagen and Cone, who are probably the best matches for the guys we are talking about here. Tim Hudson will probably be one and done. I think Smoltz would have a very hard time getting in if he wasn't part of legendary Braves' teams.

          I just feel it's a safer bet to keep the HOF more exclusive than more inclusive. it should be for the greats, not for every guy who had a few good years, or who had 55 WAR or more.

          I would say, with less than 3000 IP, an ERA+ in the high 120s would be a starting point for serious consideration. it's hard to call a guy with 2500 IP and a 122 ERA+ a HOFer, when Schilling is out, with 3200 IP and a 127 ERA+. along with legendary post season numbers.
          Well, most people here think Schilling is a top 15-20 guy.
          1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

          1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

          1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


          The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
          The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Bothrops Atrox View Post

            Most people - saber-friendly, traditionalist, and BBWAA alike have Smoltz WELL into the HOF.
            I know that's true but I can't help thinking that I would've liked to have seen more evidence of it here when he was elected instead of 15 pages of people griping about him going in before Mussina and Schilling.

            "Every HoF vote for a PED user is a clear message from those voters to Fred McGriff: 'You should have taken steroids.' Brutal." C.J. Nitkowski

            3 6 10 21 29 31 35 41 42 44 47

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by willshad View Post

              I don't think the BBWAA has a much bigger HOF than I do. They failed to elect Mussina, Schilling, Brown, all of whom I would say are very close (Mussina is a guy that this site has convinced me is a HOFer). They failed to elect Saberhagen and Cone, who are probably the best matches for the guys we are talking about here. Tim Hudson will probably be one and done. I think Smoltz would have a very hard time getting in if he wasn't part of legendary Braves' teams.

              I just feel it's a safer bet to keep the HOF more exclusive than more inclusive. it should be for the greats, not for every guy who had a few good years, or who had 55 WAR or more.

              I would say, with less than 3000 IP, an ERA+ in the high 120s would be a starting point for serious consideration. it's hard to call a guy with 2500 IP and a 123 ERA (Greinke)+ a HOFer, when Schilling is out, with 3200 IP and a 127 ERA+. along with legendary post season numbers.
              FWIW, Greinke is 34 years old and has 3 seasons left on his contract plus the rest of this season and is a shade under 490 IPs away from 3000. Barring injury, he will pitch over 3000 IPs in his career and probably end up in the 120 ERA+ ballpark, assuming some decline in performance.

              According to Bill James' Favorite Toy: Based on his age, your player can be expected to play for 4 more years, at an average of 190.7 per year. At that rate, he will finish at 3272 for his career. He has a 97 percent chance to reach 3000. He has a 27 percent chance to reach 3500. He has a 1 percent chance to reach 4000.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by jjpm74 View Post

                FWIW, Greinke is 34 years old and has 3 seasons left on his contract plus the rest of this season and is a shade under 490 IPs away from 3000. Barring injury, he will pitch over 3000 IPs in his career and probably end up in the 120 ERA+ ballpark, assuming some decline in performance.

                According to Bill James' Favorite Toy: Based on his age, your player can be expected to play for 4 more years, at an average of 190.7 per year. At that rate, he will finish at 3272 for his career. He has a 97 percent chance to reach 3000. He has a 27 percent chance to reach 3500. He has a 1 percent chance to reach 4000.
                It's not just the IP, but the quality of those IP. If Greinke is a league average pitcher for the next five years I don't feel it will help his case any. He wasted too many years in what should have been his prime.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by willshad View Post

                  It's not just the IP, but the quality of those IP. If Greinke is a league average pitcher for the next five years I don't feel it will help his case any. He wasted too many years in what should have been his prime.
                  If he ends up with an era+ of 121 and 3300 IPs, does that place him in your gray area, or clearly out? He's pretty borderline for me if that is where he ends up.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Los Bravos View Post
                    I know that's true but I can't help thinking that I would've liked to have seen more evidence of it here when he was elected instead of 15 pages of people griping about him going in before Mussina and Schilling.
                    Well - I think the fear was that he was going in 1st ballot and the other two (perceived at the time) might never make it al all. At least now it appears tht Moose is inevitable and Schilling is in decent shape. There is certainly a lot of injustice there. I think Mussina and Schilling were better. Still - even if they were all neck-an-neck...the gap in perception and reality is Grand Canyon sized.

                    I remember a lot of - Moose and schilling are better. I honestly don;t remember too much talk about Smoltz not deserving it.
                    1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

                    1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

                    1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


                    The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
                    The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by jjpm74 View Post

                      If he ends up with an era+ of 121 and 3300 IPs, does that place him in your gray area, or clearly out? He's pretty borderline for me if that is where he ends up.
                      That would make him a tad better than Tim Hudson

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by willshad View Post

                        That would make him a tad better than Tim Hudson
                        Assuming one thinks all you need to examine a pitcher in career ERA+ and IP.
                        1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

                        1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

                        1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


                        The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
                        The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Bothrops Atrox View Post

                          Well, most people here think Schilling is a top 15-20 guy.
                          Whoaaa..... he's a HOFer. but you are putting him in the Gibson, Koufax, Carlton, Marichal group.... I don't know about that. Most people..??
                          This week's Giant

                          #5 in games played as a Giant with 1721 , Bill Terry

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Bothrops Atrox View Post

                            Assuming one thinks all you need to examine a pitcher in career ERA+ and IP.
                            I thought all we needed was the overall WAR list and if a pitcher was in the top 238, they were automatically a HOFer?

                            bbrefWAR says these pitchers are active and also HOFers:

                            Zack Greinke 62.3
                            Clayton Kershaw 61.7
                            CC Sabathia 61.2
                            Justin Verlander 59.4

                            and these players:

                            Albert Pujols 99.5
                            Adrian Beltre 94.2
                            Miguel Cabrera 69.5
                            Robinson Cano 67.5 (but has a -65.0 pitchfork deficiency)
                            Chase Utley 65.9
                            Ichiro Suzuki 59.4
                            Mike Trout 57.7 (Mr. Overrated)
                            Joey Votto 56.8
                            Ian Kinsler 55.2 (WAR!)

                            This is of course intended to be parody for any of the sarcastically impaired who happen to read this and feel the need to react. ;-)
                            Last edited by jjpm74; 05-16-2018, 06:55 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Bothrops Atrox View Post

                              Assuming one thinks all you need to examine a pitcher in career ERA+ and IP.
                              Those two stats cover the vast majority of it..quality and quantity.

                              It's better than going by just one stat.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by willshad View Post

                                Those two stats cover the vast majority of it..quality and quantity.

                                It's better than going by just one stat.
                                Those are a good indicator of who is worth considering, but quantity is not the be all end all. Koufax and Dean are in the HOF and pitched less than 3000 innings. If one was to only look at Koufax's ERA+ and IP, it'd be 2424 IPs and an ERA+ of 131. By comparison, one and done superstar Johan Santana was 2025 and 136. While I think both deserve the HOF, Koufax is someone I'd rank a lot higher than Santana all time among pitchers. On the other end, there is Jack Quinn who played until he was 49 and pitched 3920.1 innings with a career ERA+ of 114 who I also have in my pHOF.
                                Last edited by jjpm74; 05-16-2018, 07:05 PM.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X