Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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