Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sam Rice vs Fred McGriff

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

  • Sam Rice vs Fred McGriff

    I'm going to run a series of polls with the winner advancing each time to face another opponent. Will leave each poll up for a week. I'll try to provide as much statistical information as possible. Hopefully we can get some lively insightful debates going and bring to light some overlooked players from yesteryear.
    If you could pick between these two players to start your franchise with which would you pick? Please consider all relavent information. Their careers as a whole, peak performance, hitting, fielding, baserunning, positional value, league quality, etc.

    Sam Rice

    2404 games
    10251 plate appearances
    9269 at-bats
    1514 runs
    2987 hits
    498 doubles
    184 triples
    34 home runs
    1078 RBI
    351 stolen bases
    143+ caught stealing
    708 walks
    275 strikeouts
    .322 AVG
    .374 OBP
    .427 SLG
    .801 OPS
    112 OPS+
    3955 total bases
    1464 runs created
    5.9 RC/G
    106 AIR
    .602 OW%
    .767 Total Average
    .203 Secondary Average
    326.1 Win Shares
    135.3 WSAB
    48.0 rWAR
    58.2 fWAR
    48.2 sWAR

    Fred McGriff

    2460 games
    10174 plate appearances
    8757 at-bats
    1349 runs
    2490 hits
    441 doubles
    24 triples
    493 home runs
    1550 RBI
    72 stolen bases
    38 caught stealing
    1305 walks
    1882 strikeouts
    .284 AVG
    .377 OBP
    .509 SLG
    .886 OPS
    134 OPS+
    4458 total bases
    1704 runs created
    6.9 RC/G
    105 AIR
    .662 OW%
    .894 Total Average
    .378 Secondary Average
    348.7 Win Shares
    176.3 WSAB
    48.2 rWAR
    61.0 fWAR
    48.1 sWAR

    Previous results

    Willie Montanez vs Dave Kingman
    Dave Kingman vs Dante Bichette
    Dave Kingman vs Jose Guillen
    Dave Kingman vs Dave Philley
    Dave Kingman vs Shano Collins
    Dave Kingman vs Eric Karros
    Dave Kingman vs Charlie Grimm
    Charlie Grimm vs Juan Gonzalez
    Juan Gonzalez vs Bill Buckner
    Juan Gonzalez vs Ruben Sierra
    Juan Gonzalez vs Gee Walker
    Juan Gonzalez vs Patsy Donovan
    Juan Gonzalez vs Joe Carter
    Juan Gonzalez vs Tommy Davis
    Juan Gonzalez vs Charlie Jamieson
    Juan Gonzalez vs Jeff Conine
    Juan Gonzalez vs Hal Chase
    Juan Gonzalez vs Lee May
    Juan Gonzalez vs Joe Kuhel
    Juan Gonzalez vs Willie Horton
    Juan Gonzalez vs Chris Chambliss
    Juan Gonzalez vs Hal McRae
    Juan Gonzalez vs Andres Galarraga
    Juan Gonzalez vs George Hendrick
    Juan Gonzalez vs Garret Anderson
    Juan Gonzalez vs George Burns
    Juan Gonzalez vs Wally Moses
    Juan Gonzalez vs Del Ennis
    Juan Gonzalez vs Don Baylor
    Juan Gonzalez vs Shawn Green
    Juan Gonzalez vs Stuffy McInnis
    Juan Gonzalez vs Wally Pipp
    Juan Gonzalez vs Gary Matthews
    Juan Gonzalez vs Bobby Bonilla
    Juan Gonzalez vs Mickey Vernon
    Mickey Vernon vs Jose Canseco
    Mickey Vernon vs Carlos Delgado
    Carlos Delgado vs B.J. Surhoff
    Carlos Delgado vs Ken Griffey Sr
    Carlos Delgado vs Wally Joyner
    Carlos Delgado vs Cecil Cooper
    Carlos Delgado vs Jim Bottomley
    Carlos Delgado vs Harold Baines
    Carlos Delgado vs Chili Davis
    Carlos Delgado vs Steve Garvey
    Carlos Delgado vs Magglio Ordonez
    Carlos Delgado vs Paul O'Neil
    Carlos Delgado vs Dave Parker
    Carlos Delgado vs Moises Alou
    Carlos Delgado vs Jake Daubert
    Carlos Delgado vs George J Burns
    Carlos Delgado vs Felipe Alou
    Carlos Delgado vs Don Mattingly
    Carlos Delgado vs Hugh Duffy
    Carlos Delgado vs Al Oliver
    Carlos Delgado vs Dixie Walker
    Carlos Delgado vs Fred Tenney
    Carlos Delgado vs Chuck Klein
    Carlos Delgado vs Heinie Manush
    Carlos Delgado vs Rusty Staub
    Carlos Delgado vs Joe Judge
    Carlos Delgado vs Mark Grace
    Carlos Delgado vs Ed Konetchy
    Carlos Delgado vs Bobby Veach
    Carlos Delgado vs Jim Rice
    Jim Rice vs Jason Giambi
    Jim Rice vs Lou Brock
    Jim Rice vs Fred McGriff
    19
    Sam Rice
    21.05%
    4
    Fred McGriff
    78.95%
    15
    My dream ballpark dimensions
    LF: 388 Feet...Height 37 Feet...LCF: 455 Feet...CF: 542 Feet...Height 35 Feet
    RCF: 471 Feet...RF: 400 Feet...Height 60 Feet
    Location....San Diego

  • #2
    I know it was the dead ball era, but that's an awful lot of "lower" doubles seasons. I know he was very important, but at the moment, I don't see an overwhelming reason to take him over McGriff. So I'm picking Fred.
    46 wins to match last year's total

    Comment


    • #3
      I like Sam Rice and I think he's a bit underrated but Fred McGriff would be a first ballot hofer if not for his era.
      "(Shoeless Joe Jackson's fall from grace is one of the real tragedies of baseball. I always thought he was more sinned against than sinning." -- Connie Mack

      "I have the ultimate respect for Whitesox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Redsox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country."--Jim Caple, ESPN (Jan. 12, 2011)

      Comment


      • #4
        Fred by a mile.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by chicagowhitesox1173 View Post
          I like Sam Rice and I think he's a bit underrated but Fred McGriff would be a first ballot hofer if not for his era.
          I think Rice is overrated and should not even be in the HOF. A career OPS+ of 112 for a RFer is not HOF worthy.

          Comment


          • #6
            The stats presented in detail are all offensive, i.e. batting stats. Rice is 69 runs above average for baserunning, fielding, and dp. McGriff is 69 runs below average. That's a swing of about 14 WAR that isn't broken down in Cowtipper's data, although it's implied by the nearly identical WAR scores.

            No doubt, McGriff was the better hitter. But Rice was an outstanding outfielder, as even his traditional fielding stats show, not to mention his reputation. McGriff, on the other hand, shows up as about 120th in fielding runs above average with -34.

            Rice was a good baserunner and hit into few dp's. McGriff was not and hit into plenty.

            Now 7 years ago, we would have said, "A good fielding center-right fielder vs an average fielding first baseman. That's not enough to make up a difference of over 20 OPS+ points." (as if we had any idea how much the difference was worth in defensive value or how much an ops+ point is worth in terms of runs or wins).

            But we have a lot more data now than then. From what I've seen, there doesn't seem to be a dime's worth of difference between them, matched against their respective contemporaries.
            Last edited by Jackaroo Dave; 01-21-2013, 06:27 PM.
            Indeed the first step toward finding out is to acknowledge you do not satisfactorily know already; so that no blight can so surely arrest all intellectual growth as the blight of cocksureness.--CS Peirce

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by SavoyBG View Post
              I think Rice is overrated and should not even be in the HOF. A career OPS+ of 112 for a RFer is not HOF worthy.
              Yeah he's overrated with the ops but I still have to wonder what kind of career stats he would have ended up with if he started at a normal age. I think he was 28 or 29 when he started playing fulltime. He may have ended up with 3700 career hits if he started at a normal age.
              "(Shoeless Joe Jackson's fall from grace is one of the real tragedies of baseball. I always thought he was more sinned against than sinning." -- Connie Mack

              "I have the ultimate respect for Whitesox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Redsox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country."--Jim Caple, ESPN (Jan. 12, 2011)

              Comment


              • #8
                Here's something odd: traditional "runs created" has Rice with 2558 and McGriff 2406. I don't know why my eye was drawn to R/RBI but it was. Rice had only 77 more PA in 56 less games, so that wasn't it. I figured Rice played into the 30s so it is just a more offensive era. But moving down we come to AIR which supposedly measures the offense environment. It was 106-105 in Rice's favor. Is one point enough to explain the difference? What is AIR exactly other than something I have seen for years. Is it ballparks. Well Rice played in Griffith Stadium which by all descriptions that made their way to my eyes and ears was no Baker Bowl. If you went that way then Rice is more productive, runs better and played a more demanding position and by all accounts did it well.

                We get to evaluating based on raw numbers irrespective of context and McGriff crushes Rise. It is not even close. Despite having less R+RBI-HR version runs created by nearly 150 in over 50 more games in careers that had AIR of 105 and 106 McGriff (or more precisely a team of McGriffs) is considered to create 1 more run/game (6.9-5.9) with a 60 point higher OWP (.662-.602). The OPS+ is not even close 134-112.

                We come to WAR it is 48.2 - 48.0 in McGriff's favor. Back to square one.
                Rice in his favor did not really start until he was 29. He is giving us these numbers missing several years of the traditional athletic peak for baseball (27-32) and with at least some of that presumably getting up to speed.
                I still think McGriff is short changed by his era and people forget from @ 88-93/94 he was a premiere player in his leagues. I give my vote to McGriff because I think he rose higher.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by PVNICK View Post
                  Here's something odd: traditional "runs created" has Rice with 2558 and McGriff 2406. I don't know why my eye was drawn to R/RBI but it was. Rice had only 77 more PA in 56 less games, so that wasn't it. I figured Rice played into the 30s so it is just a more offensive era. But moving down we come to AIR which supposedly measures the offense environment. It was 106-105 in Rice's favor. Is one point enough to explain the difference? What is AIR exactly other than something I have seen for years. Is it ballparks. Well Rice played in Griffith Stadium which by all descriptions that made their way to my eyes and ears was no Baker Bowl. If you went that way then Rice is more productive, runs better and played a more demanding position and by all accounts did it well.

                  We get to evaluating based on raw numbers irrespective of context and McGriff crushes Rise. It is not even close. Despite having less R+RBI-HR version runs created by nearly 150 in over 50 more games in careers that had AIR of 105 and 106 McGriff (or more precisely a team of McGriffs) is considered to create 1 more run/game (6.9-5.9) with a 60 point higher OWP (.662-.602). The OPS+ is not even close 134-112.

                  We come to WAR it is 48.2 - 48.0 in McGriff's favor. Back to square one.
                  Rice in his favor did not really start until he was 29. He is giving us these numbers missing several years of the traditional athletic peak for baseball (27-32) and with at least some of that presumably getting up to speed.
                  I still think McGriff is short changed by his era and people forget from @ 88-93/94 he was a premiere player in his leagues. I give my vote to McGriff because I think he rose higher.
                  I recall when R+RBI-HR was introduced it was called "runs produced." It's not too surprising that Rice did well, because he lost almost nothing in the -HR piece. But subtracting home runs is fallacious anyway. This dings McGriff heavily, because he hit so many more HR. But a homer just IS both a run scored and a run driven in. An ordinary run is a run driven in by someone else, an ordinary RBI is a run scored by someone else.

                  I believe AIR reflects the relative percentage of runs per game in the batter's playing environment to the overall mean, adjusting for both park and era. So as you'd expect. I think if you hover or click over the tab you'll get a short explanation. I believe the actual calculation is pretty complex, as anything with park factors is.

                  What I wonder about is McGriff's positional run penalty, which would be high considering the output of his first base contemporaries. But then Ruth was playing right field . . .

                  Anyway you slice it, nearly 50 WAR after age 27 is a bunch.
                  Indeed the first step toward finding out is to acknowledge you do not satisfactorily know already; so that no blight can so surely arrest all intellectual growth as the blight of cocksureness.--CS Peirce

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by SavoyBG View Post
                    I think Rice is overrated and should not even be in the HOF. A career OPS+ of 112 for a RFer is not HOF worthy.
                    That makes me think Ichiro would be an interesting comp for Rice. Both starting late, hitting for average in a sluggers' era, not taking many walks, but just hitting machines, relatively low ops+ center fielders who found themselves in right. good peripherals despite the low BB rate.

                    Anyway, I wasn't aware that Rice was rated at all any more. He was stuck at about 50% with the writers, then Joe Judge wrote a strong and apparently effective article in Sports Illustrated about him. This was about the time that Glory of Their Times came out, and next year, 1962, I believe, he was inducted by the VC.
                    Indeed the first step toward finding out is to acknowledge you do not satisfactorily know already; so that no blight can so surely arrest all intellectual growth as the blight of cocksureness.--CS Peirce

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Jackaroo Dave View Post
                      I recall when R+RBI-HR was introduced it was called "runs produced." It's not too surprising that Rice did well, because he lost almost nothing in the -HR piece. But subtracting home runs is fallacious anyway. This dings McGriff heavily, because he hit so many more HR. But a homer just IS both a run scored and a run driven in. An ordinary run is a run driven in by someone else, an ordinary RBI is a run scored by someone else.

                      I believe AIR reflects the relative percentage of runs per game in the batter's playing environment to the overall mean, adjusting for both park and era. So as you'd expect. I think if you hover or click over the tab you'll get a short explanation. I believe the actual calculation is pretty complex, as anything with park factors is.

                      What I wonder about is McGriff's positional run penalty, which would be high considering the output of his first base contemporaries. But then Ruth was playing right field . . .

                      Anyway you slice it, nearly 50 WAR after age 27 is a bunch.
                      Thanks for the response. Why do you call subtracting out HR a fallacy. The concept was 'runs produced' as you say (it's been so long I forgot and am stuck in the nomenclature du jour). But a solo HR is one one run on the scoreboard despite the HR hitter getting a run and an RBI (ie: 1+1=2 but is only 1 run for the team). Anyway it's really more a curiosity question on something that I just happened to notice but did not put much weight on.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        --Rice is probably overrated by OPS+. Griffith was a horrible park for power hitters, but Rice wasn't going to be hitting many balls over the fence no matter where he played. He was a good hitter fir average, but hardly a great one by contemporary standards. That where the Ichiro comparison breaks down for me. Ichiro was the best hitter for average of his generation (and maybe the best baserunner and defensive corner outfielder).
                        Being the best at a significant component of the game makes one far more hall worthy than being pretty good at that same skill.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by PVNICK View Post
                          Thanks for the response. Why do you call subtracting out HR a fallacy. The concept was 'runs produced' as you say (it's been so long I forgot and am stuck in the nomenclature du jour). But a solo HR is one one run on the scoreboard despite the HR hitter getting a run and an RBI (ie: 1+1=2 but is only 1 run for the team). Anyway it's really more a curiosity question on something that I just happened to notice but did not put much weight on.
                          --A HR is a whole run contributed by the batter, while runs or RBI delivered by other means are really half runs (shared wuth the guy who got the other).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Very hard to pick, I punted and went with Rice because his skills would have been valuable in most any era of baseball.
                            "If I drink whiskey, I'll never get worms!" - Hack Wilson

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Rice: Willie Wilson or Ichiro or Carew Sr. I think he was a terrific player and if anything he's Underrated. He gets short shrift from analysts here and there-but deserves bettet methinks. He's an easy Hof. Not enough pretty walk totals I guess.

                              I really like Crime Dogg, he should be in too.

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X