Mike Donlin - Potential?

[1905 Giants]

Mike Donlin was an extraordinary hitter when he played, and in the 5 seasons he played 100+ games he went .339/.386/.464 158 OPS+.

I've read (In "Baseball Chronicles") that he was distracted from the game by a secondary career as an actor with his girlfriend.

My question is: If he had played a few more (at least semi-complete) seasons, that he could have made the Hall?

[filihok]

Mike Donlin was an extraordinary hitter when he played, and in the 5 seasons he played 100+ games he went .339/.386/.464 158 OPS+.

I've read (In "Baseball Chronicles") that he was distracted from the game by a secondary career as an actor with his girlfriend.

My question is: If he had played a few more (at least semi-complete) seasons, that he could have made the Hall?

You left out some interesting things about him

in 1905 he put up 8 WAR
Early in 1906 he broke his leg, and missed most of the season
In 1907 he didn't play due to a salary dispute and this is when he became interested in acting
In 1908 he came back to baseball and put up 7.5 WAR
He didn't play in 1909 or 1910
He tried to come back in 1911 but wasn't the same player

So, maybe. He missed a good part of his prime and he was a very good player in his prime.

Without all the missed time he may have been a player on the HoF bubble (or he may have not played up to his 1905 and 1908 levels and fallen well short, or he could have had a long decent career which would have gotten him in, or ...)

[PVNICK]

His career is sooo interrupted. He comes up as a 21 year old and his first two seasons are (for reasons unknown to me) shy of 300 PA in the one league NL He goes .323/.366/.470 and .326/.361/.507 with 6 and 10 HR respectively good for 10th (peresumably tied) and 3rd in part time duty. He jumps to the AL and with McGraw's Baltimore club gets in a full(er) 121g season. He hits .340/.409/.475 and scores 107 runs. The HR totals are noting noteworthy, so who knows if he had power or just inside the park randomness becuase the triples went from 6,6 to 13 whiel the HR went from 6,10 to 5. 1902 he is with the Reds in the NL and plays in 34 games batting .287/.333/.378. 1903 is a big year .351/.420/.516 with 110 runs and a 155 OPS+ (a high to date). 1904 sees him moved midseaon to the Giants and bhe plays in only 102 games but puts up .329/.383/.457 line. 1905 is the monster season .356/.413/.495 124 runs to lead the leaguye and 80 RBI a career high with a 167 OPS+ which is 3rd in the NL for the second straight year. As noted '06 is a wash, '07 nada '08 another big season then a curtain call in 1911. Certainly the talent is there. Perhaps if baseball paid better he might have been more focused on the game and had a full career but that is speculation on my part and ignores the injuries.

[Jackaroo Dave]

Well,he had the potential to wind up in Cooperstown, and the potential to wind up in Sing Sing. He actually wound up in Hollywood, so we'll call it a wash.

[dgarza]

in 1905 he put up 8 WAR
.....
In 1908 he came back to baseball and put up 7.5 WAR

Were are you getting these numbers from? BB-Ref shows 6.5 in 1905 and 5.8 in 1908.

[dgarza]

He surely had the potential. What he did in such a truncated career is solid stuff.

Here are the Top Positional WAR leaders with 4300 or less PAs:

                                                           
Rk            Player WAR/pos   PA OPS+    G From   To   Age
1        Fred Dunlap    35.4 4264  134  965 1880 1891 21-32
2         Ryan Braun    32.0 3854  147  883 2007 2012 23-28
3     Dustin Pedroia    30.7 3824  117  856 2006 2012 22-28
4         Bill Joyce    29.5 4163  143  906 1890 1898 22-30
5        Ian Kinsler    28.7 4177  111  930 2006 2012 24-30
[B]6        Mike Donlin    28.6 4282  144 1049 1899 1914 21-36[/B]
7      Evan Longoria    28.5 2726  137  637 2008 2012 22-26
8        Benny Kauff    28.0 3563  149  859 1912 1920 22-30
9     Grady Sizemore    26.5 4047  120  892 2004 2011 21-28
10        Joey Votto    26.2 3064  155  728 2007 2012 23-28
11       Lefty ODoul    26.1 3658  143  970 1919 1934 22-37
12          Dave Orr    25.8 3411  162  791 1883 1890 23-30
13   Troy Tulowitzki    25.7 3177  117  744 2006 2012 21-27
14       Ben Zobrist    25.4 3126  118  761 2006 2012 25-31
15         Ed Bailey    25.1 4212  110 1212 1953 1966 22-35

[1905 Giants]

Well,he had the potential to wind up in Cooperstown, and the potential to wind up in Sing Sing. He actually wound up in Hollywood, so we'll call it a wash.

Heh. That's a good one Jackaroo.

[filihok]

Were are you getting these numbers from? BB-Ref shows 6.5 in 1905 and 5.8 in 1908.

From FanGraphs.

[ol' aches and pains]

Were are you getting these numbers from? BB-Ref shows 6.5 in 1905 and 5.8 in 1908.

From FanGraphs.

I'm biting my tongue here. I actually taste blood in my mouth, I'm biting so hard.

[filihok]

I'm biting my tongue here. I actually taste blood in my mouth, I'm biting so hard.

You should probably not do that, explains the user name though

[ol' aches and pains]

You should probably not do that, explains the user name though

You have no idea.

[Jackaroo Dave]

I'm biting my tongue here. I actually taste blood in my mouth, I'm biting so hard.

Go ahead, spit it out. Two different statistical procedures, both calling themselves WAR, means that people who use either are pitiful dupes. Something like that?

Kind of like the way people who buy things with dollars are pitiful dupes because the Canadian dollar, the Australian dollar, and the US dollar all have different values?

This happens a lot. Pretty soon people will get used to the idea that filihok uses fWAR while the rest of us use bWAR because we're used to it and it's easier to assemble custom leader boards.

If you make a list of players and rank them according to the two systems, the amount of unexplained variation in comparing them will be too slight to matter. Comparing across systems 1 to 1 mdoesn't work, but the values of one could be converted into the other--like dollars. If you ran a regression, you'd get almost complete agreement.

When there's a systematic difference between them, it represents a disagreement about what is how important.

You can tell the analysts from the pundits by how they react to this. If they think this is grounds for ridicule, they're in the Jack Morris, McGloughlin Report faction. If they think it's interesting, something worth exploring, they're in the Nate Silver tradition.

[filihok]

This happens a lot. Pretty soon people will get used to the idea that filihok uses fWAR while the rest of us use bWAR because we're used to it and it's easier to assemble custom leader boards.

Have you played with the new FanGraphs leaderboards?

They are magnificent.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/custom-leaderboards/

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/how-i-use-our-custom-leaderboards/

You can choose players, you can choose stats, you can choose splits, you can choose era, you can save your leader boards

[Jackaroo Dave]

Have you played with the new FanGraphs leaderboards?

They are magnificent.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/custom-leaderboards/

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/how-i-use-our-custom-leaderboards/

You can choose players, you can choose stats, you can choose splits, you can choose era, you can save your leader boards

B b b but it uses this unreal WAR. I'm so confused! Everything I know is wrong!

By the way, maybe in the stats forum, I'd like to find out what is your preference is for fWAR.

[ol' aches and pains]

Go ahead, spit it out. Two different statistical procedures, both calling themselves WAR, means that people who use either are pitiful dupes. Something like that?

No, nothing like that, and I'll thank you to not put words in my mouth. But without casting any aspersions on anyone, for the time being I'll stick with stats that are calculated only one way, with no possible difference of opinion. Because to me, until there's a consensus on how to calculate the damned thing, that's what it is-an opinion.