Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Playoff Hall of Fame project, group 49

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

  • jalbright
    replied
    Moving on to the winner's bracket are Blyleven, Fregosi, Keller, and Winfield. The rest move to the loser's bracket. The official results:
    .......
    Code:
     
    76 Bert Blyleven
    64 Dave Winfield
    51 Charlie Keller
    31 Jim Fregosi
    27 Maury Wills
    26 Darrell Porter
    25 Bobo Newsom
    8 Chick Hafey

    Leave a comment:


  • jjpm74
    replied
    Originally posted by BigRon View Post
    Tough group to grade.

    4. Wills- I think the stress he placed on pitchers and defenses is underappreciated
    That is a good point. Runners like Wills and Brock probably deserve some extra credit for how much they disrupted pitchers when they were on base.

    Leave a comment:


  • henrich
    replied
    1. Blyleven
    2. Winfield
    3. Newsom
    4. Wills
    5. Hafey
    6. Keller
    7. Porter
    8. Fregosi

    Leave a comment:


  • BigRon
    replied
    Tough group to grade.

    1. Blyleven- still not sure he's a top 20 pitcher like so many here say, but he' s a clear HOFer
    2. Winfield- personal distaste aside, I think he's a little bit overrated
    3. Keller, with some war credit- probably a better player than Winfield, but career shortened by WW2, then serious back injury

    The next guys are largely interchangeable. I was basically throwing darts.

    4. Wills- I think the stress he placed on pitchers and defenses is underappreciated
    5. Fregosi- stats are depressed by his era and ballpark, but I never saw him as outstanding
    6. Porter- didn't see him enough to appreciate what Herzog did
    7. Newsom- pretty decent pitcher over many years
    8. Hafey- could have been higher with less missed time

    Leave a comment:


  • Toledo Inquisition
    replied
    Originally posted by Jar of Flies View Post

    I'm getting the ads too

    For a playing time advocate like yourself, u gotta love Fregosis in season durability versus the often injured Hafey.

    a big difference for the two of us is positional value, it's harder to find an 8 year durable 20% better than average hitter/average fielder at SS versus a 30% better than average hitter at the easiest defensive position with poor durability
    Now it's getting weird...some BBF pages open with all sorts of ads and some open with only the ribbons....this is using multiple browsers...strange.


    Both Fregosi and Hafey had shorter careers with not many full seasons, so not a lot of credit for either of them, but Fregosi does pick up some value there as Chick had more health issues (sinus, rotten tooth, beanings and most especially terrible eyesight).

    I agree with your point about our positional durability different perspectives. Their OPS+ values are 113 vs. 133, though Fregosi did have those extra 2300 PA's.

    I think a player should be good at some aspect of the game for the HOF, regardless of the assigned positional rarity/value. All that Fregosi has on his docket is that he played shortstop, hit above average and was a regular for eight years. However, he was the best of a bad lot of shortstops in a weakened league. Comparing that, we have Chick Hafey who was a vastly superior hitter and defensively he had a rocket for an arm in right and had decent range. However, he was only a regular for six years as opposed to Fregosi's eight.

    I'm not advocating Chick for the HOF at all! He didn't have enough of a career...just saying when they were on the field, I believe Chick was superior. Fregosi was a B- hitter who just happened to play shortstop....it's not like he was Alexei Ramirez bad, but still a weak player for the level of this project.

    Originally posted by jjpm74 View Post

    Are you using Chrome with adblocker? That is keeping all but the top banner from appearing.
    I normally never get any ads on this site except the top and bottom ribbons using any browser.


    Originally posted by Chadwick View Post

    For those interested in "combo" cases - which are outside the scope of this particular project, I understand - there is the fact that Fregosi won over 1,000 games in his managerial career, most notably leading the 1993 Phillies to the World Series.
    He's very lucky I'm not considering him as a combo case! He was a brutal manager for the White Sox in the late 1980's! We went from Tony LaRussa to Jim Fregosi. Even though I was only in high school, I was wondering what the heck Fregosi was often doing. It was no big loss for the White Sox when he departed.

    Originally posted by jjpm74 View Post

    I like to think of Fregosi as a 60s version of Nomar Garciaparra. Like Nomar, Fregosi was either the best or one of the best shortstops in the game, but only for a relatively short time and his career flamed out early due to chronic injuries. During his peak years of 1964-1970, he was very highly regarded and seen as a future HOFer. That peak was so good that it elevates him into the gray zone for me and a lot of other people looking at peak value players.
    I think he was one of the best of a bad lot, so that doesn't influence me much. I'm no Nomar HOF advocate, but at least he was a great player for four years or so. Jim Fregosi is a poor man's Nomar.
    Last edited by Toledo Inquisition; 10-29-2019, 08:51 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chadwick
    replied
    I think the differences are:

    1. Fregosi was clearly the best shortstop in his league during his peak, Nomar was not clearly so, at least.
    2. Unlike Fregosi, Nomar was one of the league's best players, irrespective of position, at his peak.
    3. Nomar had a higher peak, but Fregosi had a longer prime.

    Leave a comment:


  • jjpm74
    replied
    Originally posted by Toledo Inquisition View Post
    I know there is a lot of Jim Fregosi love as a HOFer or near HOFer, but would anyone like to help me out a little? Here's a guy with only 8 seasons as regular plus two more as a 60% player. He was an average defender at short, and was +.022 to 0.024 above the league in BA/OBP/SLP, which isn't good for a shorter career. He was done as a regular at age 29, and his career totals aren't great at all.

    He was an All Star 6 times and did pop up occasionally as a top 10 guy on the more secondary leader boards (and twice in runs scored), but he wasn't that great in a weaker league.

    Please help me out - I'm trying to see his greatness. Assume I'm an even duller person than normal, and try to make this discussion without WAR.
    I like to think of Fregosi as a 60s version of Nomar Garciaparra. Like Nomar, Fregosi was either the best or one of the best shortstops in the game, but only for a relatively short time and his career flamed out early due to chronic injuries. During his peak years of 1964-1970, he was very highly regarded and seen as a future HOFer. That peak was so good that it elevates him into the gray zone for me and a lot of other people looking at peak value players.

    Leave a comment:


  • jjpm74
    replied
    Originally posted by Jar of Flies View Post

    I'm getting the ads too

    For a playing time advocate like yourself, u gotta love Fregosis in season durability versus the often injured Hafey.

    a big difference for the two of us is positional value, it's harder to find an 8 year durable 20% better than average hitter/average fielder at SS versus a 30% better than average hitter at the easiest defensive position with poor durability
    Are you using Chrome with adblocker? That is keeping all but the top banner from appearing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    1. Bert Blyleven
    2. Charlie Keller
    3. Dave Winfield
    4.Darrell Porter
    5. Jim Fregosi
    6. Maury Wills
    7. Bobo Newsom
    8. Chick Hafyer

    Leave a comment:


  • Chadwick
    replied
    1. Bert Blyleven
    2. Dave Winfield
    3. Charlie Keller
    4. Jim Fregosi
    5. Darrell Porter
    6. Bobo Newsom
    7. Maury Wills
    8. Chick Hafey


    Fregosi, BTW, was such a big star, it took the Mets offering Nolan Ryan and three other players to land Fregosi from the Angels. Unfortunately, a foot tumor and broken thumb led to diminished production in 1971-72 which soon became the norm as additional injuries would pile up. Fregosi was a big star in his time, though, and widely viewed as a future manager. Both the Angels and Mets saw him as their big league skipper of the future.

    While it's anecdotal, no less a star than Al Rosen, the former Giants slugger, said of Fregosi that he "may be one of the best players this game has ever produced. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen a shortstop who can do as much as Fregosi." Keep in mind that Rosen played with or against Luke Appling, Lou Boudreau, Vern Stephens, Phil Rizzuto and Luis Aparicio, among others, and had ample opportunity to have watched Pee Wee Reese, Maury Wills and Bert Campaneris. Fregosi's problem as a player isn't that he wasn't good enough, it's that the injuries effectively ended his career before the age of 30. With anything close to a typical decline phase, he'd be far better recognized, particularly having spent the latter half of his career in New York.

    For those interested in "combo" cases - which are outside the scope of this particular project, I understand - there is the fact that Fregosi won over 1,000 games in his managerial career, most notably leading the 1993 Phillies to the World Series.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jar of Flies
    replied
    Originally posted by Toledo Inquisition View Post

    Thanks Jar of Flies!


    I'd much rather rate a player who was actually good at an element of the game than someone who received so much credit due to position. For example, Hafey was +205 Rbat/133 OPS+ in 5115 PA versus +139 Rbat/113 OPS+ in 7403 (Fregosi) shows that Hafey was the vastly superior offensive player. Fregosi was above average offensively but never actually was good at anything - and that's in a piecemeal career. If he did the same thing as a regular for 14-15 years, I'd rate him much higher.

    Note that I rated Keller higher than either, also with a very short career. For his case, at least he did something great (hitting), albeit in a short career. I think when players have short careers, they had better be very good to great at something. Your rate stats can start to drop when you've got a full career/have been a regular forever.

    The late 1960's AL was relatively weak in my opinion.


    PS - is the site acting funny for anyone else? I'm getting the big banner ads in the middle of the page, not smaller ribbon banners on the top and bottom of the page. Very hard to read the site with huge banners displaying "New Knee Aid Going Viral" ads.
    I'm getting the ads too

    For a playing time advocate like yourself, u gotta love Fregosis in season durability versus the often injured Hafey.

    a big difference for the two of us is positional value, it's harder to find an 8 year durable 20% better than average hitter/average fielder at SS versus a 30% better than average hitter at the easiest defensive position with poor durability

    Leave a comment:


  • Toledo Inquisition
    replied
    Originally posted by Jar of Flies View Post

    He was ~20th in offensive value in his big 8 years and ~+2 wins clutch also as about a 20% better than average hitter, a scratch defender at the toughest defensive position makes him very valuable in that time.
    http://www.thebaseballgauge.com/hist...t=off_a#metric

    As typical, your ranks diverge in extreme short vs long career guys, so having Fregosi low isn't surprising.
    FWIW, he was damn good, but not HOF material for me either.
    How do you get Chick Hafey at #5 and Fregosi at #8 for example?
    They appear to have similar batting value and averagish defense, but Hafey in LF/CF and Fregosi SS, with Jim in stronger leagues.
    Thanks Jar of Flies!


    I'd much rather rate a player who was actually good at an element of the game than someone who received so much credit due to position. For example, Hafey was +205 Rbat/133 OPS+ in 5115 PA versus +139 Rbat/113 OPS+ in 7403 (Fregosi) shows that Hafey was the vastly superior offensive player. Fregosi was above average offensively but never actually was good at anything - and that's in a piecemeal career. If he did the same thing as a regular for 14-15 years, I'd rate him much higher.

    Note that I rated Keller higher than either, also with a very short career. For his case, at least he did something great (hitting), albeit in a short career. I think when players have short careers, they had better be very good to great at something. Your rate stats can start to drop when you've got a full career/have been a regular forever.

    The late 1960's AL was relatively weak in my opinion.


    PS - is the site acting funny for anyone else? I'm getting the big banner ads in the middle of the page, not smaller ribbon banners on the top and bottom of the page. Very hard to read the site with huge banners displaying "New Knee Aid Going Viral" ads.
    Last edited by Toledo Inquisition; 10-28-2019, 03:25 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jar of Flies
    replied
    Originally posted by Toledo Inquisition View Post
    I know there is a lot of Jim Fregosi love as a HOFer or near HOFer, but would anyone like to help me out a little? Here's a guy with only 8 seasons as regular plus two more as a 60% player. He was an average defender at short, and was +.022 to 0.024 above the league in BA/OBP/SLP, which isn't good for a shorter career. He was done as a regular at age 29, and his career totals aren't great at all.

    He was an All Star 6 times and did pop up occasionally as a top 10 guy on the more secondary leader boards (and twice in runs scored), but he wasn't that great in a weaker league.

    Please help me out - I'm trying to see his greatness. Assume I'm an even duller person than normal, and try to make this discussion without WAR.
    He was ~20th in offensive value in his big 8 years and ~+2 wins clutch also as about a 20% better than average hitter, a scratch defender at the toughest defensive position makes him very valuable in that time.
    http://www.thebaseballgauge.com/hist...t=off_a#metric

    As typical, your ranks diverge in extreme short vs long career guys, so having Fregosi low isn't surprising.
    FWIW, he was damn good, but not HOF material for me either.
    How do you get Chick Hafey at #5 and Fregosi at #8 for example?
    They appear to have similar batting value and averagish defense, but Hafey in LF/CF and Fregosi SS, with Jim in stronger leagues.
    Last edited by Jar of Flies; 10-28-2019, 03:09 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Toledo Inquisition
    replied
    I know there is a lot of Jim Fregosi love as a HOFer or near HOFer, but would anyone like to help me out a little? Here's a guy with only 8 seasons as regular plus two more as a 60% player. He was an average defender at short, and was +.022 to 0.024 above the league in BA/OBP/SLP, which isn't good for a shorter career. He was done as a regular at age 29, and his career totals aren't great at all.

    He was an All Star 6 times and did pop up occasionally as a top 10 guy on the more secondary leader boards (and twice in runs scored), but he wasn't that great in a weaker league.

    Please help me out - I'm trying to see his greatness. Assume I'm an even duller person than normal, and try to make this discussion without WAR.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jar of Flies
    replied
    1. Bert Blyleven
    2. Charlie Keller
    3. Dave Winfield

    4. Darrell Porter
    5. Jim Fregosi
    6. Maury Wills
    7. Bobo Newsom
    8. Chick Hafey
    Last edited by Jar of Flies; 10-28-2019, 01:19 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X