Announcement

Collapse

Updated Baseball Fever Policy

Baseball Fever Policy

I. Purpose of this announcement:

This announcement describes the policies pertaining to the operation of Baseball Fever.

Baseball Fever is a moderated baseball message board which encourages and facilitates research and information exchange among fans of our national pastime. The intent of the Baseball Fever Policy is to ensure that Baseball Fever remains an extremely high quality, extremely low "noise" environment.

Baseball Fever is administrated by three principal administrators:
webmaster - Baseball Fever Owner
The Commissioner - Baseball Fever Administrator
Macker - Baseball Fever Administrator

And a group of forum specific super moderators. The role of the moderator is to keep Baseball Fever smoothly and to screen posts for compliance with our policy. The moderators are ALL volunteer positions, so please be patient and understanding of any delays you might experience in correspondence.

II. Comments about our policy:

Any suggestions on this policy may be made directly to the webmaster.

III. Acknowledgments:

This document was based on a similar policy used by SABR.

IV. Requirements for participation on Baseball Fever:

Participation on Baseball Fever is available to all baseball fans with a valid email address, as verified by the forum's automated system, which then in turn creates a single validated account. Multiple accounts by a single user are prohibited.

By registering, you agree to adhere to the policies outlined in this document and to conduct yourself accordingly. Abuse of the forum, by repeated failure to abide by these policies, will result in your access being blocked to the forum entirely.

V. Baseball Fever Netiquette:

Participants at Baseball Fever are required to adhere to these principles, which are outlined in this section.
a. All posts to Baseball Fever should be written in clear, concise English, with proper grammar and accurate spelling. The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum; when abbreviation is necessary, they should be either well-known (such as etc.), or explained on their first use in your post.

b. Conciseness is a key attribute of a good post.

c. Quote only the portion of a post to which you are responding.

d. Standard capitalization and punctuation make a large difference in the readability of a post. TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS is considered to be "shouting"; it is a good practice to limit use of all capitals to words which you wish to emphasize.

e. It is our policy NOT to transmit any defamatory or illegal materials.

f. Personal attacks of any type against Baseball Fever readers will not be tolerated. In these instances the post will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the personal attack via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue personal attacks will be banned from the site.

g. It is important to remember that many contextual clues available in face-to-face discussion, such as tone of voice and facial expression, are lost in the electronic forum. As a poster, try to be alert for phrasing that might be misinterpreted by your audience to be offensive; as a reader, remember to give the benefit of the doubt and not to take umbrage too easily. There are many instances in which a particular choice of words or phrasing can come across as being a personal attack where none was intended.

h. The netiquette described above (a-g) often uses the term "posts", but applies equally to Private Messages.

VI. Baseball Fever User Signature Policy

A signature is a piece of text that some members may care to have inserted at the end of ALL of their posts, a little like the closing of a letter. You can set and / or change your signature by editing your profile in the UserCP. Since it is visible on ALL your posts, the following policy must be adhered to:

Signature Composition
Font size limit: No larger than size 2 (This policy is a size 2)
Style: Bold and italics are permissible
Character limit: No more than 500 total characters
Lines: No more than 4 lines
Colors: Most colors are permissible, but those which are hard to discern against the gray background (yellow, white, pale gray) should be avoided
Images/Graphics: Allowed, but nothing larger than 20k and Content rules must be followed

Signature Content
No advertising is permitted
Nothing political or religious
Nothing obscene, vulgar, defamatory or derogatory
Links to personal blogs/websites are permissible - with the webmaster's written consent
A Link to your Baseball Fever Blog does not require written consent and is recommended
Quotes must be attributed. Non-baseball quotes are permissible as long as they are not religious or political

Please adhere to these rules when you create your signature. Failure to do so will result in a request to comply by a moderator. If you do not comply within a reasonable amount of time, the signature will be removed and / or edited by an Administrator. Baseball Fever reserves the right to edit and / or remove any or all of your signature line at any time without contacting the account holder.

VII. Appropriate and inappropriate topics for Baseball Fever:

Most concisely, the test for whether a post is appropriate for Baseball Fever is: "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?" This post can be direct or indirect: posing a question, asking for assistance, providing raw data or citations, or discussing and constructively critiquing existing posts. In general, a broad interpretation of "baseball related" is used.

Baseball Fever is not a promotional environment. Advertising of products, web sites, etc., whether for profit or not-for-profit, is not permitted. At the webmaster's discretion, brief one-time announcements for products or services of legitimate baseball interest and usefulness may be allowed. If advertising is posted to the site it will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the post via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue advertising will be banned from the site. If the advertising is spam-related, pornography-based, or a "visit-my-site" type post / private message, no warning at all will be provided, and the member will be banned immediately without a warning.

It is considered appropriate to post a URL to a page which specifically and directly answers a question posted on the list (for example, it would be permissible to post a link to a page containing home-road splits, even on a site which has advertising or other commercial content; however, it would not be appropriate to post the URL of the main page of the site). The site reserves the right to limit the frequency of such announcements by any individual or group.

In keeping with our test for a proper topic, posting to Baseball Fever should be treated as if you truly do care. This includes posting information that is, to the best of your knowledge, complete and accurate at the time you post. Any errors or ambiguities you catch later should be acknowledged and corrected in the thread, since Baseball Fever is sometimes considered to be a valuable reference for research information.

VIII. Role of the moderator:

When a post is submitted to Baseball Fever, it is forwarded by the server automatically and seen immediately. The moderator may:
a. Leave the thread exactly like it was submitted. This is the case 95% of the time.

b. Immediately delete the thread as inappropriate for Baseball Fever. Examples include advertising, personal attacks, or spam. This is the case 1% of the time.

c. Move the thread. If a member makes a post about the Marlins in the Yankees forum it will be moved to the appropriate forum. This is the case 3% of the time.

d. Edit the message due to an inappropriate item. This is the case 1% of the time. There have been new users who will make a wonderful post, then add to their signature line (where your name / handle appears) a tagline that is a pure advertisement. This tagline will be removed, a note will be left in the message so he/she is aware of the edit, and personal contact will be made to the poster telling them what has been edited and what actions need to be taken to prevent further edits.

The moderators perform no checks on posts to verify factual or logical accuracy. While he/she may point out gross errors in factual data in replies to the thread, the moderator does not act as an "accuracy" editor. Also moderation is not a vehicle for censorship of individuals and/or opinions, and the moderator's decisions should not be taken personally.

IX. Legal aspects of participation in Baseball Fever:

By submitting a post to Baseball Fever, you grant Baseball Fever permission to distribute your message to the forum. Other rights pertaining to the post remain with the ORIGINAL author, and you may not redistribute or retransmit any posts by any others, in whole or in part, without the express consent of the original author.

The messages appearing on Baseball Fever contain the opinions and views of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of Baseball Fever, or of the Baseball Almanac family of sites.

Sincerely,

Sean Holtz, Webmaster of Baseball Almanac & Baseball Fever
www.baseball-almanac.com | www.baseball-fever.com
"Baseball Almanac: Sharing Baseball. Sharing History."
See more
See less

Defensive Stats vs. the "Eye Test"

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by JR Hart View Post

    I don't remember Gehrig having a bunch of non HOF seasons.
    Albert was 37 last season. Lou Gehrig passed away a few weeks before his 38th birthday. Sigh

    On the other hand Pujols' last great season was @ 30. Gehrig was still going strong until his penultimate full season @ 34.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Chadwick View Post
      …Does anyone else find it surprising that the long-time statistic of fielding errors was never divided between a throwing component and a catching component? Seems that would have been fairly easy to have done all these years.
      I’ve done it for HS since 2007. Please see ======> def2a.pdf

      It’s interesting when you see how each position works out(pg 1), and even more interesting to see how the individuals break out(pgs2-7).
      The pitcher who’s afraid to throw strikes, will soon be standing in the shower with the hitter who's afraid to swing.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by JR Hart View Post

        I don't remember Gehrig having a bunch of non HOF seasons.
        Do you think Bill Tilden was a greater tennis player than Roger Federer?

        Was Bobby Jones greater than Tiger Woods?

        Was Jesse Owens better than Usain Bolt and Carl Lewis?

        Why is it only in baseball do we always assume players from 50-100 years ago must have been better because they outperformed their (on average) inferior peers more relative to much more recent players?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Stolensingle View Post

          Credit of course is given for taking an extra base, even if it's not classified as a stolen base. Credit is also given in some metrics for reached on error, because evidence indicates it's not random, that some players have a repeatable skill for that. Credit is not given for advancing a runner "deliberately", as the evidence indicates it's not a skill. Like RBI, it's a matter of opportunity.


          Agree to a point. For sure a small percentage of players do get a better read on a ball and have that base running sense, increase the chance of taking that extra base. "In general" I agree with your statement, opportunity plays a part.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Floyd Gondolli View Post

            Do you think Bill Tilden was a greater tennis player than Roger Federer?

            Was Bobby Jones greater than Tiger Woods?

            Was Jesse Owens better than Usain Bolt and Carl Lewis?

            Why is it only in baseball do we always assume players from 50-100 years ago must have been better because they outperformed their (on average) inferior peers more relative to much more recent players?
            Bobby Jones, Bill Tilden, et. al are really more their sports equivalents of the 19th Century players. By Gehrig's time baseball had been a professional sport for a half century. For the NBA that would be the equivalent of Michael Jordan's return from his first retirement, for the NFL the Steel Curtain dynasty. as for golf, tennis and track , to some extent one can't fairly compare because of the equipment advances in rackets, clubs, spikes, aero gear and track surfaces..

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by PVNICK View Post

              Bobby Jones, Bill Tilden, et. al are really more their sports equivalents of the 19th Century players. By Gehrig's time baseball had been a professional sport for a half century. For the NBA that would be the equivalent of Michael Jordan's return from his first retirement, for the NFL the Steel Curtain dynasty. as for golf, tennis and track , to some extent one can't fairly compare because of the equipment advances in rackets, clubs, spikes, aero gear and track surfaces..
              This article is worth your time.

              https://sabr.org/bioproj/topic/baseb...hics-1947-2012

              Also:

              Drstrangelove did extensive research that showed that through 1960, the average black player in the MLB had produced a 128 OPS+ at about 20% integration rate, and about 137% of "wins" per 162 games determined by war. The average white player during that period produced a 93 OPS+ and about 91% of average wins. Furthermore the black players were replacing the bottom 20% of the league that produced much less than that. Based on the bottom 20% production rate prior to integration it suggests that integration raised the level of the average major league player by almost exactly 15% by 1960.

              Half of the best players since integration, or more, have been black, and at a level of integration to match the population, black players were outproducing white players by a ratio of 137 to 91 (war based wins), or about 150% as much. In fact if integration had been allowed to occur to match the likely distribution of talent, you would have had to approximately triple the number of black players, and had about half of all major league players be black by 1960. Black players had to produce more, and play better to get into the MLB in 1960 that white players.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Floyd Gondolli View Post

                This article is worth your time.

                https://sabr.org/bioproj/topic/baseb...hics-1947-2012

                Also:

                Drstrangelove did extensive research that showed that through 1960, the average black player in the MLB had produced a 128 OPS+ at about 20% integration rate, and about 137% of "wins" per 162 games determined by war. The average white player during that period produced a 93 OPS+ and about 91% of average wins. Furthermore the black players were replacing the bottom 20% of the league that produced much less than that. Based on the bottom 20% production rate prior to integration it suggests that integration raised the level of the average major league player by almost exactly 15% by 1960.

                Half of the best players since integration, or more, have been black, and at a level of integration to match the population, black players were outproducing white players by a ratio of 137 to 91 (war based wins), or about 150% as much. In fact if integration had been allowed to occur to match the likely distribution of talent, you would have had to approximately triple the number of black players, and had about half of all major league players be black by 1960. Black players had to produce more, and play better to get into the MLB in 1960 that white players.
                That's nice I remember Dr. Strangelove's data and don't disagree. But you completely ignored or missed my point, namely that MLB had at least a half century of existence on these other sports. At any rate you brought up golf and tennis which are still largely white and track wherein you listed three men of color so I'm not sure what integration has to do with my point.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Floyd Gondolli View Post

                  Do you think Bill Tilden was a greater tennis player than Roger Federer?

                  Was Bobby Jones greater than Tiger Woods?

                  Was Jesse Owens better than Usain Bolt and Carl Lewis?

                  Why is it only in baseball do we always assume players from 50-100 years ago must have been better because they outperformed their (on average) inferior peers more relative to much more recent players?
                  How fast do you think that human evolution goes? Do you really believe that the very greatest athletes only perform now? Give Tilden, Owens, or Bobby Jones the training and nutrition of today and who knows? Humans aren't evolving that fast. Do you really think that Michael Phelps will be seen as Pee Wee Herman in 50 years??? That's ridiculous!!
                  This week's Giant

                  #5 in games played as a Giant with 1721 , Bill Terry

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by JR Hart View Post

                    How fast do you think that human evolution goes? Do you really believe that the very greatest athletes only perform now? Give Tilden, Owens, or Bobby Jones the training and nutrition of today and who knows? Humans aren't evolving that fast. Do you really think that Michael Phelps will be seen as Pee Wee Herman in 50 years??? That's ridiculous!!
                    I think the fact that black ballplayers were 50% better than white players by 1960 speaks volumes.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Floyd Gondolli View Post

                      I think the fact that black ballplayers were 50% better than white players by 1960 speaks volumes.
                      that has nothing to do with the point that I resoponed to, since Jesse Owens and Carl Lewis are both black.

                      And where did you get your 50% from, or did you judt make up that number.out of your.....
                      This week's Giant

                      #5 in games played as a Giant with 1721 , Bill Terry

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by JR Hart View Post

                        that has nothing to do with the point that I resoponed to, since Jesse Owens and Carl Lewis are both black.

                        And where did you get your 50% from, or did you judt make up that number.out of your.....
                        Here's the sources (research with citations):
                        https://sabr.org/bioproj/topic/baseb...hics-1947-2012

                        And

                        https://sabr.org/bioproj/topic/integration-1947-1986

                        And 50% better is understating it when it comes to the percentage of both All Stars and Hall of Famers relative to the % of African American players in MLB since Jackie broke through.

                        It's all there, facts and the historical reality. In stark black and white, JR. (No pun intended).

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Didn't think there'd be any riposte here after posting those links (much less a cogent response).

                          "Facts don't care about your feelings." -Ben Shapiro

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            You still ignored the FACT that baseball had 50-75 years of history under its belt by he time the NFL or NBA, Bobby Jones or Bill Tilden or the Munich Olympics got underway. I don't see any 19th Century players on any all-time lists with the exception of Cy Young, and he spent about a third of his career in the 20th Century. In football you would say that Jim Brown, Johnny Unitas, Don Hutson and perhaps even up to guys like Butkus and Nitschke, Deacon Jones would fit under the same early 50 years. In the NBA which began in 1947 or thereabouts the chamberlain, Russell, Robertson, West, Cousy, Pettit era covers the first 25 years of a now 70 year old league. In golf players like Sam Snead, Ben Hogan and Arnold Palmer are still revered and if they got to play with modern club (and chemicals) may well be the equal if not superior to Tiger. We get that integration ups the floor or at least adds more high end performers but without acknowledging that the post-infancy generation gets a lot of attention the argument comes off more as push-polling than a serious examination.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              By the way I think we have gone completely off the rails when looking at the thread topic. (insert appropriate emoticon).

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Floyd Gondolli View Post

                                I think the fact that black ballplayers were 50% better than white players by 1960 speaks volumes.
                                This is largely due to the fact that you HAD to be better than average in order to be a black player in the A.L. from 48-70. Just try to find a middle-of-the-pack player in the A.L. of the 60s.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X