Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Steve Garvey

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

  • sturg1dj
    replied
    Originally posted by Chadwick View Post
    Interesting conversation about fielding at first base here, with data updated with most up-to-date Retrosheet data.

    Towards the end of the article, guess who pops up as historically poor in certain respects?
    there are two things that popup here that I think are worth noting.

    1) The Garvey stuff, being historically bad at throwing at first base

    2) Scott Hatteberg being historically bad as well, and basically showing the weakness of the original moneyball way of thinking and how so much has changed. They put no emphasis on defense. The data wasn't there and they did not care. Today, they would take defense into account as well. Which is why I always get a kick out of people here are elsewhere seeing the movie moneyball (or even reading it, but that is more rare) and using that as their whole understanding of advanced baseball analytics. That was what they used 21 years ago, not now.

    Leave a comment:


  • sturg1dj
    replied
    Originally posted by willshad View Post
    Let's not forget that Garvey also came along during a historically weak point for fist basemen, especially in the NL. For most of his prime, he was far and above the rest of the guys at his position. I think this helped a lot in his perception as a huge star.
    this is true, and while there are many 5-10 years stretches where he is the best 1b in the NL (or even perhaps baseball) it is less about his output and more about how nobody was really sticking at first in the league at the time. Looking at his first big season, his MVP season of 1974 his 1b peers in the NL were Tony Perez, Lee May and Joe Torre; who were all past their respective primes. Even passed his prime Perez was putting up OPS+s around the same level as Garvey during this time.

    And after that season you get a revolving door of over the hill players being moved to 1b, younger players who are looking for a position (like Dale Murphy) and Keith Hernandez who showed up and had similar batting averages (actually won a batting title) not as many home runs (but not that far off), many more walks, and was the best fielding first baseman ever when he played.

    When it comes to Garvey, I am at the point where I wouldn't be angry if he got in, just disappointed. And I would hope that at least Keith Hernandez got in as well, so the world made sense. But the Harold Baines precedent exists so who knows what will happen.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by Chadwick View Post
    Interesting conversation about fielding at first base here, with data updated with most up-to-date Retrosheet data.

    Towards the end of the article, guess who pops up as historically poor in certain respects?
    I was JUST saying a few days ago that Pujos was THE best at throwing out advancing runners I have ever seen. I love it when the data justifies my perceptions. People really undersell just doe dynamic Pujols was a fielder.
    Last edited by Bothrops Atrox; 03-12-2021, 12:09 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chadwick
    replied
    Originally posted by Toledo Inquisition View Post
    Ready to revise your opinion of a certain Paul Konerko based on this?
    Not to a fantastical extent (i.e. Hall-worthy).

    Leave a comment:


  • Toledo Inquisition
    replied
    Originally posted by Chadwick View Post
    Not as disgusted as some of his supporters who have posted herein over the years.

    Frankly, while I consider Garvey's case unconvincing, I wouldn't cry over his election. I would just hope that such mistakes are made alongside a mass election of more worthy candidates rather than Garvey alone.

    The Modern Era covering 1970-1987 greats, including non-players, and limited to 10 votes really shouldn't even have Garvey on the ballot. There are too many better-qualified candidates from those years, including the criminally underrated Keith Hernandez.
    Ready to revise your opinion of a certain Paul Konerko based on this?

    Leave a comment:


  • PVNICK
    replied
    The throwing phobia and the 3-6-3 DP. He was moved from 3B because of the throwing issue or so I have inferred.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chadwick
    replied
    Interesting conversation about fielding at first base here, with data updated with most up-to-date Retrosheet data.

    Towards the end of the article, guess who pops up as historically poor in certain respects?

    Leave a comment:


  • jjpm74
    replied
    Originally posted by Floyd Gondolli View Post
    Do you think Steve Garvey would be thrilled, disgusted, incredulous, or totally indifferent if he read through this thread?
    If Garvey comes here and reads through al 261 pages of this thread, I think he'd be pretty irritated since the thread goes nowhere and it would take him the better part of a day. It basically reads like the crappy checkout aisle romance novels that get dumped in the free library at the beach.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chadwick
    replied
    Originally posted by Floyd Gondolli View Post
    Do you think Steve Garvey would be thrilled, disgusted, incredulous, or totally indifferent if he read through this thread?
    Not as disgusted as some of his supporters who have posted herein over the years.

    Frankly, while I consider Garvey's case unconvincing, I wouldn't cry over his election. I would just hope that such mistakes are made alongside a mass election of more worthy candidates rather than Garvey alone.

    The Modern Era covering 1970-1987 greats, including non-players, and limited to 10 votes really shouldn't even have Garvey on the ballot. There are too many better-qualified candidates from those years, including the criminally underrated Keith Hernandez.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by Floyd Gondolli View Post
    Do you think Steve Garvey would be thrilled, disgusted, incredulous, or totally indifferent if he read through this thread?
    99% of the time I would say that the player wouldn't care. But Garvey seems like a very sensitive type - I could see him being a bit frustrated.
    And then promptly forget it as he goes back to his multi-million $$$ lifestyle while laughing at all of us no-life internet jockeys.

    Leave a comment:


  • Floyd Gondolli
    replied
    Do you think Steve Garvey would be thrilled, disgusted, incredulous, or totally indifferent if he read through this thread?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by willshad View Post

    It's interesting how sometimes an early career 'future HOFer' tag will stick for a long time. Some guys who peak early and also decline early don't lose much status (think Griffey Jr, Rice, or F Thomas) while others fall out of favor. Garvey is kind of in the middle, he peaked early, at one point was seen as an easy future HOFer but is still seen as something of a borderline guy. Contrast to someone like Al Oliver, who looks similar career-wise but wasn't seen as a HOfer while active and peaked late. He is still seen as far behind Garv.

    I think the general consensus is that it's good to peak late, but sometimes I'm not so sure.
    The moniker USUALLY sticks once repeated enough. There are occasional Garveys or Mattinglys...but not many.

    Leave a comment:


  • willshad
    replied
    Let's not forget that Garvey also came along during a historically weak point for fist basemen, especially in the NL. For most of his prime, he was far and above the rest of the guys at his position. I think this helped a lot in his perception as a huge star.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chadwick
    replied
    I agree. Baseball is a family sport.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cougar
    replied
    Originally posted by Chadwick View Post
    Peter O'Malley's sons (Kevin and Brian) and two nephews (Peter and Tom Seidler) are minority owners in the San Diego Padres.

    Peter, himself, no longer owns or works for the Dodgers, but stepped in and rescued the Dodgertown complex at Vero Beach after the Dodgers (under Frank McCourt's ownership) abandoned the facility. Thanks to O'Malley's efforts (which include his sister, Hideo Nomo and Chan Ho Park as partners), "Historic Dodgertown" (as it's now called) has been salvaged and designated a national historic landmark.

    O'Malley will turn 82 next month, incidentally.
    So the family is still in the game, more or less. That's a good thing, I believe, with apologies to old folks with Brooklyn roots.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X