Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Steve Garvey

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by Captain Cold Nose
    The perception he was a great fielder took a hit, because a hard look revealed he did not do too much more than catch the ball at first
    I'm still intrigued by this because he was always up there in Range Factor, and I don't think it was like Russell or Sax were exactly great help?
    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


    • #47
      He was a much better fielder than history seems to remember him as being.

      As for his offensive stats, I'm curious as to how "park factor" can be used to detract a lot from the accomplishments of pitchers such Koufax and Drysdale in many people's minds, yet the opposite does not seem to hold true for batters? If Koufax's and Drysdale's stats are perceived as being less great for having pitched in Dodger Stadium, then shouldn't Steve Garvey's and Shawn Green's hitting stats be given more weight?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by west coast orange and black
        captaincoldnose wrote “But [Garvey’s] image took a serious nosedive when the bitter ex-wife spilled her guts, revealing he wasn't Johnny Perfect. The perception he was a great fielder took a hit, because a hard look revealed he did not do too much more than catch the ball at first (a lot was made of this during an all-star game where he had to throw a batter out at the plate).

        two things jump out strikingly to me: 1) cyndy garvey is described as ”bitter”, whereas the total truth is that steve garvey admitted cheating on his wife and fathering the children of different women while married; 2) garvey’s suspect arm is the main reason that he was quickly moved from third to first at the start of his career (28 errors in 85 games, though not all throwing, of course). i think that the all-star game mentioned ought to be downplayed, but a “great fielder” has got to throw, no?
        Of course a great fielder has to throw. And that was my unclear point about the all-star game reference. The announcers at the time made a big deal about the play because it was something Garvey did not ordinarily do.

        As for the Cyndy Garvey comment, I won't really go there except every interview I have seen her in since Garvey's amorous relevation has her basically bashing men in general. Wronged, or not, she comes off as bitter.
        Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
        Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
        Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
        Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
        Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by OldSchoolFan
          Since we are talking about Steve Garvey, I have a quite question for everyone. I know that Cal Ripken is a lock for the Hall. However do you guys think that Cal would be considered as strongly if he did not have the streak? I've always thought that he was overrated because of it.
          He might not be considered AS strongly and it may overrate him SLIGHTLY but a shortstop with 431 HR, 1695 RBI, 2 MVPs, 603 doubles and 2 Gold Gloves (and I have him deserving five) probably deserves to go in the Hall
          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


          • #50
            THANK YOU about the Gold Gloves, RMB. OldSchool, the only area where the streak overrates Cal is in the "all-time players" field, not the HOF. But this is about Garvey.

            It's a terrific point made by CCN about players from the 70's- 80's (and 80's in particular). Tim Kirkjian even wrote an article on it. Not only does it bite Garvey, but Rice, Dawson, Murphy, Hernandez, Parker, and soon Tim Raines.

            It's a tough question to sort out: are these players a victim of the times they played in, or were they just not HOF caliber? Parity vs. Mediocrity; though by higher standards, it's the same argument.

            As of now, I say no. For one thing, the man couldn't take a walk. In 8800+ at bats, he walked under 500 times. To compare: in 7300+ at bats, Keith Hernandez walked 1070 times. In 9200+ at bats, Joe Morgan walked over 1850 times. I say this because OBP is the closest average tied to team-winning; more than BA, more than slugging, even more than OPS if I remember correctly. Of course, this totally paints me as a hypocrite since I endorse Andre Dawson .

            There are some other points I want to make, but I'm being called away for now.
            http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploa...-showalter.gif

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by OldSchoolFan
              Since we are talking about Steve Garvey, I have a quite question for everyone. I know that Cal Ripken is a lock for the Hall. However do you guys think that Cal would be considered as strongly if he did not have the streak? I've always thought that he was overrated because of it.

              Would not be considered the "lock" that he is now.
              Waner, Mantle, Bench, Nightal?

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by nightal
                Would not be considered the "lock" that he is now.
                Maybe not, but the 3000 hits and 400 Home runs from the shortstop position would still get him first ballot. But he may not be the standout candidate in 2007 without the streak. Gwynn and his 7 batting titles might get a higher percentage, as might McGwire. With the streak, he clears 95%.
                Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
                Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
                Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
                Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
                Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Freakshow
                  Regarding Garvey's fielding. Pete Palmer's linear weights metric, popularized in Total Baseball, showed him as a subpar fielder. Much of this was due to poor estimates of defensive innings and failure to adjust for his team context.

                  OTOH, win shares has him a grade A fielder, winning seven Win Shares gold gloves. Some of that is due to playing time, but in any case, these newer stats show him as actually deserving of his fine reputation.
                  That is what is so confusing, people seem to think he was either awesome or horrible. I have him as statistically winning at least three.
                  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


                  • #54
                    i do not see garvey as either awesome or terrible. rather, as a very good hitter who wanted the bat in his hands when the game was on the line. i also see him as a first baseman who had severe limitations with popups and throwing. i am not calculating with linear weights metric, i am simply relying on what i saw.
                    "you don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. just get people to stop reading them." -ray bradbury

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by west coast orange and black
                      i do not see garvey as either awesome or terrible. i also see him as a first baseman who had severe limitations with popups and throwing.
                      I was referring to Garvey DEFENSIVELY, so apparently you're closer to the "terrible" camp
                      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


                      • #56
                        --Garvey wasn't Kieth Hernandez (or even Mattingly or Murray), but he surely wasn't terrible defensively. He had good range and great hands. His only real liability I rember was he had a very poor arm. Of course, I was/am mostly an AL fan so maybe I didn't see him enough to notice the popup thing.
                        --He wasn't a great hitter by firstbase standards, but he was pretty good. His less than stellar power numbers can be partly excused by Dodger Stadium (although he had less power in SanDiego). His unwillingness to take a walk and relativley poor OBPs are harder to excuse. I say no to the HoF, although he is surely better than george kelly.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by leecemark
                          --Garvey wasn't Kieth Hernandez (or even Mattingly or Murray.
                          Now I only have Murray deserving two Gold Gloves
                          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


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by RuthMayBond
                            I was referring to Garvey DEFENSIVELY, so apparently you're closer to the "terrible" camp
                            garvey a terrible defensiveman? i don't think so. i would have to think that he was subpar to average, and i do not. i think that garvey's all-around work was above average. however, because he did not go after the ball (read: be aggresive rather than shy away) and did not throw to second, third and the plate there is no way that he can rank amongst the best in mlb.

                            i wrote earlier that garvey’s suspect arm is the main reason that he was quickly moved from third. and that i do not see garvey as either awesome or terrible, rather, as a first baseman who had severe limitations with popups and throwing. i am sticking with my earlier post.
                            "you don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. just get people to stop reading them." -ray bradbury

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              70s 1st Baseman

                              This is what I remember in those times: During the middle 70s to early 80s, Steve Garvey was the #1 1st baseman. Stargel, Perez, McCovey, Chambliss, Mayberry, Watson, May, or Powell weren't given the status Garvey was. As far as defence goes, none of these guys were great defensively. George Scott was conidered very good defensively and I don't think he was all that good compared to standards today. This excludes Keith Hernandez. I don't think I'll ever see anyone a great defensively as Keith Hernandez again.
                              In the 1920's, Harry Heilmann led the AL with a .364 average. In addition, he averaged 220 hits, 45 doubles, 12 triples, 16 homers, 110 runs, and 130 RBI.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                I am with WCOB on Garvey. He was good around the bag and he could really pick the throws in the dirt, but don't ask him to be a cut off man! And he was a clutch player as any Cub fan will tell you. But overall I don't think he measures up to the other 1B in the hall already, both to the one's of his era and the entire group overall.

                                As a cheap aside, I actually physically ran into Garvey once at an Los Angeles Kings hockey game (he came round a corner as was going the other way) not a big deal, but what suprised me was how small he was. I'm 5'6", and Garvey can't be more than 5'9-10". I was sort of used to guys like McCovey, McGwire etc who tower over me, so his smallish stature was a mild shock.

                                KH14
                                “Well, I like to say I’m completely focused, right? I mean, the game’s on the line. It’s not like I’m thinking about what does barbecue Pop Chips and Cholula taste like. Because I already know that answer — it tastes friggin’ awesome!"--Brian Wilson

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X