Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Morganites Unite!!!!!!

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

  • Ubiquitous
    replied
    You had three chances to guess right and failed

    Leave a comment:


  • jjpm74
    replied
    Originally posted by Ubiquitous View Post
    I'll give you three guesses.
    1. You're a troll with nothing better to do.
    2. You are back to abusing your moderator status by once again trolling other users with pointless posts then deleting them.
    3. Both a and b.

    Leave a comment:


  • Honus Wagner Rules
    replied
    I fondly remember the Morgan vs Hornsby debates we had back then.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ubiquitous
    replied
    I'll give you three guesses.

    Leave a comment:


  • jjpm74
    replied
    Originally posted by Ubiquitous View Post
    Bump de bump
    Bored? Why bump 15 year old dead threads with no actual input on your part? Seems kind of pointless.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ubiquitous
    replied
    Bump de bump

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Originally posted by Ubiquitous View Post
    Joe Morgan was the first secondbasemen in the history of baseball to have to field his position while playing on Astroturf. This wasn't an easy thing to do at the time and it took awhile for players to properly figure it out. Hell, people say Ozzie Smith was the first to figure it out and he didn't start playing full time on Astroturf until 16 years after the introduction of Astroturf. Secondly most players before the age of steroids tended to hit a wall and decline.

    As far as second base open hitting I'm not sure why you are comparing Joe Morgan to 500 home run club hitters and then declaring Joe inferior. Yes, Joe is inferior to most people who hit 500+ homers, that generally happens when you don't hit 500+ homers yourself.
    I'm using player relative stats. Morgan's OPS+ relative to himself was 80 and Schmidt's was 97. That's relative to themselves being 100. Bonds was 127 I think. How about a high batting average guy with a similar OPS+. Gwynn was 117 realtive to self with runner on second only. His slugging and BA were basically inaffected and he still got all the extra walks. Morgan got the walks but dropped off a lot in both BA and Slugging.

    Here is ALL versus -2- batting and slugging and player relative OPS+ in -2- and -23
    Morgan: .271/.227 .427/.342 80 83
    Gwynn: .338/.332 .459/.457 117 146
    Carew: .328/.324 .429/.425 112 179
    Brett: .305/.287 .487/.466 117 136
    Clemente: .317/.311 .475/.447 110 154

    All these guys had better personally relative OPS+ scores with first base empty, except for Morgan who had a big drop-off. They ALL drew a lot more walks, but Morgan lost so much in BA that his OB% actually drops a little while all the others got a BIG boost in OB%-they drew more walks, but did not lose nearly as much in BA.

    I don't know if its due to style of play (good BA guys hit better in bigger payoff situations) or if its due to Morgan just being particularly poor in those situations, but all hits and especially singles are worth relatively more compared with walks with a runner on second and first base empty. IOW there is no doubt that his non-situational relative stats overrate him and from the looks of things by about 2% or more! compared to these guys, who were literally the first 4 I picked. It accounts for 10% of his plate appearances, and he has about a 20% drop while they have about 20% increases. He made some of that back in other-lower value-situations.

    I'd really like to see -2- and -23 with 2 outs for these guys. In those situations the relative value of a walk is only about half as much in most situations, or about 35% as much as a single (though the sample size is going to be small, like 250 plate appearances.
    Last edited by brett; 07-24-2009, 08:59 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ubiquitous
    replied
    Joe Morgan was the first secondbasemen in the history of baseball to have to field his position while playing on Astroturf. This wasn't an easy thing to do at the time and it took awhile for players to properly figure it out. Hell, people say Ozzie Smith was the first to figure it out and he didn't start playing full time on Astroturf until 16 years after the introduction of Astroturf. Secondly most players before the age of steroids tended to hit a wall and decline.

    As far as second base open hitting I'm not sure why you are comparing Joe Morgan to 500 home run club hitters and then declaring Joe inferior. Yes, Joe is inferior to most people who hit 500+ homers, that generally happens when you don't hit 500+ homers yourself.

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Originally posted by Ubiquitous View Post
    Morgan had a .390 OBP with first base open for his career which tells me that pretty much the only time they gave Morgan something to hit was when the opposing team thought the conditions favored them overwhelmingly in the situation.

    Schmidt was the bigger home run threat so of course his SLG is going to be higher. When he did get a hit in those rare situations when the opposing team decided to pitch to him and he hit it safely of course those hits were going to produce a higher slugging than Joe's. Schmidt did hit over 500 homers and while I don't recall exactly how many homers Joe hit I do believe he fell a few homers shy of 500. Secondly we are talking about 50 some odd at bats spread out over a season for Joe with Joe hitting the stuffing out of the ball in his prime.


    Finally a player who over his entire career averages out to being an average fielder means that in his prime and for most of his career he was an above average fielder and probably a very good fielder. Joe Morgan played an up the middle position until he was 40 years old.
    Well, I had the big 3 second basemen ranked back to back to back at one point: 12th, 13th and 14th so I'm looking at fine details. At that time, I had the perception of Morgan as a "multi-gold glove winner" but it really took him a LONG time to develop into that, and he lost it fast. As far as hitting, I am big on walks and on-base percentage, but I saw some film of Morgan batting, and boy his mechanics (and the other all-stars) were just flat out inferior to modern hitters. They used way to much arms to swing, and not enough body. Anyway, that's based on a year ago avaluation and at the time I had a working theory that good batting average guys tend to be able to produce in higher reward situations while lower average guys with walks tend to produce, but in lower reward situations.

    Schmidt has a 97 tOPS+ with a runner on second only, and Morgan is 80. Schmidt's OB% goes up 5% and his slugging only drops about 8% a little while Morgan keeps his OB% but loses over 20% off his slugging. Frank Thomas hits better (107 tOPS+) with a .481 OB%. I guess he was less likely to score from first.

    I suspect that Morgan would have stolen 1000 bases in Collins time and granted Collins got caught a lot-its hard to tell where he

    Leave a comment:


  • EdTarbusz
    replied
    Originally posted by nerfan View Post
    Dude, Schlabotnik batted .004!
    But his baseball card was very difficult to find. It was probably a high number.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ubiquitous
    replied
    Morgan had a .390 OBP with first base open for his career which tells me that pretty much the only time they gave Morgan something to hit was when the opposing team thought the conditions favored them overwhelmingly in the situation.

    Schmidt was the bigger home run threat so of course his SLG is going to be higher. When he did get a hit in those rare situations when the opposing team decided to pitch to him and he hit it safely of course those hits were going to produce a higher slugging than Joe's. Schmidt did hit over 500 homers and while I don't recall exactly how many homers Joe hit I do believe he fell a few homers shy of 500. Secondly we are talking about 50 some odd at bats spread out over a season for Joe with Joe hitting the stuffing out of the ball in his prime.


    Finally a player who over his entire career averages out to being an average fielder means that in his prime and for most of his career he was an above average fielder and probably a very good fielder. Joe Morgan played an up the middle position until he was 40 years old.

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Originally posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    he admits disliking Hornsby but says its incidental

    Collins had better numbers

    see his book
    It really depends on a) how steals are evaluated and b) hoe good a fielder Collins was-some metrics say "good" some say top 4 c) how poor a fielder Hornsby was considered to have been. Neither of those is agreed upon even by stats experts.

    I have dropped Morgan to third and have him in the 15-18 range because over the duration of his career he netted being a dead average fielder and because he hit particularly poorly with a runner on second and first base empty-a situation where singles are worth relatively more than usual. Most hitters drop off in those situations but his dropoff in batting and slugging in those situations is particularly large suggesting that he wasn't really a .300 hitter who walked a lot, he was a big walker whose average was a byproduct of selectivity, pop and speed, but you could pitch to him if you had to.

    Schmidt fell off in BA, but not as much and kept a lot more of his slugging in those situations.

    Still, arguing that Gehringer is better than Morgan is statistically absurd.

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Originally posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    so Rickey and Joe played a 162 game season together and you assert Joe as a seasoned 40 year old soon to be Hall of Famer made one comment to him and that is it?

    I did read a newspaper article late in '84 where they talked about Henderson driving the ball (he hit 16 home runs) and that Morgan's tutelage was a reason for it. Ironically, the article suggested that the increased power might have cut into his steals somehow (he stole 66 and barely lead the league) and that he might be "ruining" his game.

    Leave a comment:


  • SHOELESSJOE3
    replied
    Originally posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    he admits disliking Hornsby but says its incidental
    Collins had better numbers

    see his book
    I won't beat this one to death, about his personal feeling on Hornsby.
    But, let be realistic, if his dislike did effect his take on Hornsby the ball player would he admit it.
    Thats all for that one.

    On the book, did read some of it a while ago, I'll take your advice, I will revisit the book.

    Leave a comment:


  • 9RoyHobbsRF
    replied
    Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    So were a good number of other players born before James was born, what does that have to do with him showing a dislike for Hornsby.

    Also James telling one side of the issue of Hornsby not attending his mother's service..........which I did explain, the real story from the news archives.

    Your statement about Hornsby playing before James was born............what about it, so did Collins, Lajoie and many others that played second base, a non issue.
    He also downplays Hornsby's numbers harping on the years he played in a hitters park. he was .358 at home and the same on the road, also one time held the highest NL batting average for a season and also the NL slugging record....on the road.

    I'll take your word for James saying Hornsby was a devastating hitter, so how does he conclude he was not the best offensive hitting second baseman.

    All I'm saying and so obvious, his overall take on Hornsby, he shows a dislike for him and makes no bones about it.
    he admits disliking Hornsby but says its incidental

    Collins had better numbers

    see his book

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X