Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Carl Yastrzemski's odd career

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

  • 9RoyHobbsRF
    replied
    DiMaggio never adapted to Yankee Stadium. These guys weren't dumb but they couldn't do what Yaz had to.


    this is just crazy

    Yaz did not adapt to anything other than play in a bandbox and any attempt to say otherwise is just baloney

    and for what it's worth

    DiMag hit .315 and slugged .546 in YS
    Yaz hit .306 and slugged .503 in Fenway

    and Yaz did not miss 3 prime years to a war

    I would say DiMag adapted pretty well

    and DiMag hit .334 and slugged .605 in Fenway
    Yaz hit .278 and slugged .434 in YS
    Last edited by 9RoyHobbsRF; 01-06-2013, 06:45 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • filihok
    replied
    Originally posted by brett View Post
    that's not true man. A projection could attempt to model a hypothetical (past).
    Fair enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Originally posted by filihok View Post
    A projection is an attempt to say what will happen in the future.

    We're not talking about the future...we're talking about the past.
    that's not true man. A projection could attempt to model a hypothetical (past).

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Originally posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    could not disagree more

    having a tight field with narrow foul territory and getting more chances for hits from foul pop ups not being caught is not being smart or taking advantage or learning or being adaptive

    it is being lucky to have your career played in a offensive park

    not too mention a stupid high fence turning easy outs into hits

    as for this thread and being more impressed ... what little I thought of Yaz due to glaring park illusions is now even more diminished due to his disgruntled locker room antics disrupting teams111

    Those are all factors that help all players though, so they show up in all the relative stats. My data shows that Yaz' rates were about 12% better because of his park rates, but 7% of that advantage was had by all players who played for or against them and 5% was particular to him (and other guys like Boggs and Rice similarly).

    Leave a comment:


  • Jackaroo Dave
    replied
    Originally posted by filihok View Post
    I don't think it has much (some, but not 'much') to do with intelligence. Some guys are right-handed fly ball pull hitters. Those guys will benefit more from Fenway than other types of hitters.
    For example, left-handed line drive hitters. Unless they develop an inside out swing that lets them beat a tattoo off the green monster.

    Maybe "bodily intelligence" is a better word. It doesn't take a lot of smarts to figure out that going the other way is a good option, but doing it, that's another story. Big Papi couldn't do it for years. Williams never did. DiMaggio never adapted to Yankee Stadium. These guys weren't dumb but they couldn't do what Yaz had to.

    Why didn't Yaz learn to adapt to every road stadium, Roy? I suspect for the same reason no one else does. He played 81 games at home, what, 9 in each of the others, in about three rounds of three?

    Honestly, arguing with you is like arguing with the Bourbons, except sometimes you forget things.

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Originally posted by filihok View Post
    A projection is an attempt to say what will happen in the future.

    We're not talking about the future...we're talking about the past.
    OK, used the wrong word.
    But, also I wasn't, we're not talking about the past, because it never happened.
    I'm speaking of what Brett "expected" Carl's home rates might be based on his road rates and an average park factor and normal home road split data.
    So the home rate he came up with, what might be expected never happened, it's what he believes it may have been, what might be expected, compared to what they actually were.
    Due respect to Brett, he always does his homework, but I don't put much into what something might have been or should have been based on a formula.
    I go by what the player did at home and on the road, the difference.

    Leave a comment:


  • lizmcl
    replied
    Originally posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    while he certainly played well it seems a little bit of a stretch to say he "single-handedly" destroyed Oakland
    True. It was more that that was how it seemed to us at the time -- Yaz had been overshadowed pretty much that whole season by Lynn and Rice, and looked his age most of the time, but when he went on a tear in that series we all thought "Jeez, this guy isn't done after all." He was the only player we were talking about those three days -- "My god, did you see what Yaz did, did you see him throw that guy out, did you see him score on that hit, I forgot he could run like that!"

    I'm talking impressions, not so much statistics. Other players played as well, or better, but for that series he was the one we were talking about out on the porch after the series was over. For someone who most of us thought was a tired old man, that series was his rebirth.

    Leave a comment:


  • filihok
    replied
    Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    Looks like most are on the same page here, Yaz and many other Bosox hitters have hugh home/away gaps.
    Where we differ, in degree how much did they benefit and how much of a factor does it mean in their overall stats.

    I still think it's downplayed too much by some, I put more into Bosox benefiting at home than some others on the board, means a good deal.
    I don't like mathematical projections because we have no way of knowing how accurate they and won't be drawn into a debate about that.
    A projection is just that, not fact what some present as a belief.
    I keep it simple, a guy rips the cover off the ball at home and a drastic reduction on the road, he really made out at home.
    A projection is an attempt to say what will happen in the future.

    We're not talking about the future...we're talking about the past.

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Looks like most are on the same page here, Yaz and many other Bosox hitters have hugh home/away gaps.
    Where we differ, in degree how much did they benefit and how much of a factor does it mean in their overall stats.

    I still think it's downplayed too much by some, I put more into Bosox benefiting at home than some others on the board, means a good deal.
    I don't like mathematical projections because we have no way of knowing how accurate they and won't be drawn into a debate about that.
    A projection is just that, not fact what some present as a belief.
    I keep it simple, a guy rips the cover off the ball at home and a drastic reduction on the road, he really made out at home.

    Leave a comment:


  • filihok
    replied
    Originally posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    yes I already added that
    Looks like 10 minutes after I posted, but yeah, you did.

    and if he was so smart and was able to adapt, why didn't that same trait display in road games????? Did he suddenly lose his IQ and adaptive powers?
    I don't think it has much (some, but not 'much') to do with intelligence. Some guys are right-handed fly ball pull hitters. Those guys will benefit more from Fenway than other types of hitters.

    Leave a comment:


  • 9RoyHobbsRF
    replied
    Originally posted by filihok View Post
    And a short left-field fence that you can hit fly balls off of that turn into singles and doubles instead of outs.
    yes I already added that

    and if he was so smart and was able to adapt, why didn't that same trait display in road games????? Did he suddenly lose his IQ and adaptive powers?

    Leave a comment:


  • filihok
    replied
    Originally posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    could not disagree more

    having a tight field with narrow foul territory and getting more chances for hits from foul pop ups not being caught is not being smart or taking advanatge or learning or being adative or smart
    And a short left-field fence that you can hit fly balls off of that turn into singles and doubles instead of outs.

    Leave a comment:


  • 9RoyHobbsRF
    replied
    could not disagree more

    having a tight field with narrow foul territory and getting more chances for hits from foul pop ups not being caught is not being smart or taking advantage or learning or being adaptive

    it is being lucky to have your career played in a offensive park

    not too mention a stupid high fence turning easy outs into hits

    as for this thread and being more impressed ... what little I thought of Yaz due to glaring park illusions is now even more diminished due to his disgruntled locker room antics disrupting teams111

    Originally posted by Jackaroo Dave View Post
    The last time this topic appeared, and I went through all of Yaz's home-road splits, the relative OPS+ showed the same overall conclusion, though not in such detail. As before, I'd like to remind Roy that taking advantage of one's home park speaks to the player's intelligence and flexibility. Yaz, Mel Ott, Chuck Klein, Bill Dickey, and lesser lights like Thurman Munson and Wally Moon were better able to help their teams win thereby.

    As repeatedly and most conclusively shown, most players play better at home--in part because they learn how to adapt to it. Yaz learned better than most. This discussion has deepened my respect for him.
    Last edited by 9RoyHobbsRF; 01-06-2013, 03:39 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jackaroo Dave
    replied
    Originally posted by brett View Post
    Using Yaz' road rates of .264/.357/.422 and an average park factor of 107, and normal home road split data I get expected home rates for him in Boston to be:

    .292/.395/.468 compared to the actual .306/.402/.503

    Or another way to look at it is that his road rates predict an overall OPS+ about 4-5% lower than he actually produced. (Or that his road relative OPS+ was 124-125 relative to all players on the road.

    but we can't be sure that he didn't sacrifice some of his road stats to taylor his approach to his park, just that his relative home advantage is greater than average. As we've seen with many Colorado players, when they go somewhere else, their home rates drop but their road rates come up some.
    The last time this topic appeared, and I went through all of Yaz's home-road splits, the relative OPS+ showed the same overall conclusion, though not in such detail. As before, I'd like to remind Roy that taking advantage of one's home park speaks to the player's intelligence and flexibility. Yaz, Mel Ott, Chuck Klein, Bill Dickey, and lesser lights like Thurman Munson and Wally Moon were better able to help their teams win thereby.

    As repeatedly and most conclusively shown, most players play better at home--in part because they learn how to adapt to it. Yaz learned better than most. This discussion has deepened my respect for him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by brett View Post
    Using Yaz' road rates of .264/.357/.422 and an average park factor of 107, and normal home road split data I get expected home rates for him in Boston to be:

    .292/.395/.468 compared to the actual .306/.402/.503

    Or another way to look at it is that his road rates predict an overall OPS+ about 4-5% lower than he actually produced. (Or that his road relative OPS+ was 124-125 relative to all players on the road.

    but we can't be sure that he didn't sacrifice some of his road stats to taylor his approach to his park, just that his relative home advantage is greater than average. As we've seen with many Colorado players, when they go somewhere else, their home rates drop but their road rates come up some.
    This all seams very reasonable.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X