Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Did Jimmy Wynn have a good season in 1976?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Did Jimmy Wynn have a good season in 1976?

    Now, before I get into the topic of this thread, I would like to say that this is not intended to transform into another "Wynn for HOF" thread, or a "Wynn>Griffey" thread. This is an honest sabermetric question, which I think speaks about how player can still be good without a good batting average. Forget that the guy's name is Jim Wynn, let's just look at his stats and ask ourselves whether he had a good year.

    Now, I think he did have a good year in '76. Of course, his BA was .207, which is horrible, a 77 rel. BA. But, look past the BA and you'll find he did everything very well outside of that. He walked a fantastic 127 times, which makes for a very good .377 OBP, 40 points higher than the league average despite the horrible BA.

    He was also a very good power hitter, and the SLG doesn't do him justice in this area. Slugging percentage is TB/AB, so that is counting singles, which are not a part of power hitting. In order to get a better idea of a player's true power, you should subtract BA from SLG to get Isolated power, which basically just takes out the bases at first. It is a measure of extra bases. Wynn has a .160 Isolated power. A very good total, and 39% better than the league average.

    He was also very good in the field and on the bases that year. He stole 16 bases at a solid 73% success rate. He was still fast at this age.

    Wynn always did have a good reputation in the field, and as late as 1976 he was shown by all metrics I know of to be very good. He had a 108 relative RF, BP and fielding runs both show him 7 runs above average that year, and defensive Win Shares has him just a few points away from a Gold Glove that year.

    Overall, all the value metrics think he did have a good year that season. WARP3 has him at 5.7, a pretty good total, WS has him at 18, just two 'shares away from an all star level season. TPR has him at 1.4, well above average.

    So, what do you guys think?
    5
    Yes
    80.00%
    4
    No
    20.00%
    1
    Tags: None
  • #2
    PCA has him at:

    9.48 wins created on offense.
    3.07 wins created on defense.

    PCA is generally more aggressively extreme (in either direction...bad or good) than most other player metrics because I use higher replacement levels which has the effect of placing more importance on being different from average...reward average players way less and good players way more.

    And Jimmy Wynn was decidedly not bad in 1976.

    Comment

    • #3
      I'd be willing to go as far as saying that he walked enough to have a decent season, but not much more. When it comes down to it, he did only have a .207 BA, and 127 walks just doesn't cut it. What about the guy with a .307 BA and 127 walks, that gives him a .477 OBP - now THAT'S great, .377 isn't great, it's good, but not great, and as to his power, he only hit 17 HR's, and 19 doubles (1 triple), where's the power? He did have some power earlier in his career, but not in '76. Yes, 127 walks is great, not many can do that, it's only been beaten or tied 80 other times in the history of the MLB, but the difference, it that 79 of those times, were by players who actually had decent BA's to back up their amazing walk totals, not ones hovering around Mendoza.

      Comment

      • #4
        --"Not bad" is not the same thing as good. Wynn was a much better player than his BA would suggest, but he wasn't somebody you'd go out of your way to pick up for your team either. At least real baseball teams didn't think so. He had a hard time finding a job for 1977 and was out of baseball the following year.

        Comment

        • #5
          Originally posted by leecemark
          --"Not bad" is not the same thing as good. Wynn was a much better player than his BA would suggest, but he wasn't somebody you'd go out of your way to pick up for your team either. At least real baseball teams didn't think so. He had a hard time finding a job for 1977 and was out of baseball the following year.
          He didn't have a hard time finding a job the next year. He was signed on November 30th by the Yankees, not too far after the season had ended, and the Yankees wanted to make Wynn their DH. That didn't work out, as Wynn had a horrible hitting season to end his career but he didn't really "have a hard time finding a job".

          Comment

          • #6
            Real baseball teams understood nothing about the importance of OBP in 1977...your point?

            I wouldn't call his 1976 "GREAT"...but he was very good.

            Comment

            • #7
              Heres a little anecdote about Baseball teams in the 60's and 70's.
              Charlie O' the owner of the A's was notoriously cheap and had a barebone staff, with himself an insurance salesmen making most of the decisions. Yet this newbie built one of the greatest dynasties of baseball. Want to know how he went about acquiring baseball players? He'd take the official baseball guides and look at the players batting averages! Thats it no formulas, no scouts, no reviews. He would look to see if a player had a consistently good batting average and if so he wanted him. If he didn't he avoided them. That simple system help fuel the great A's run of the 70's.

              Comment

              • #8
                LOL.

                Yes well...if you can acquire guys with high batting averages, you'll score runs and win games regardless of plate discipline.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ubiquitous
                  Heres a little anecdote about Baseball teams in the 60's and 70's.
                  Charlie O' the owner of the A's was notoriously cheap and had a barebone staff, with himself an insurance salesmen making most of the decisions. Yet this newbie built one of the greatest dynasties of baseball. Want to know how he went about acquiring baseball players? He'd take the official baseball guides and look at the players batting averages! Thats it no formulas, no scouts, no reviews. He would look to see if a player had a consistently good batting average and if so he wanted him. If he didn't he avoided them. That simple system help fuel the great A's run of the 70's.
                  Really? That surprises me, because the A's were a low batting average team, even for that era. Their BAs 1972-1974 were .240, .260, .247. Their stars were mostly low BA guys who were still productive because of other reasons (power, walks, baserunning, fielding). Guys like Reggie, Bando, Tenace, Campeneris, Dick Green, Bill North. Those guys weren't good because of their BA, but rather good despite their BA. It seems strange Finley would have guys like that on his team if he was just signing on BA.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Ubiq,

                    As you admitted that anecdote, is, well,...anedcotal.

                    I'm sure there was a pretty wide range in regards to how important different execs of different teams felt just merely getting on base was. Branch Rickey understood that decades before 1977.

                    Are we that self-important to think that baseball men of yore didn't recognize the relationship between getting on base and scoring runs, and realize that you could get on by walking as well as hitting?
                    THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT COME WITH A SCORECARD

                    In the avy: AZ - Doe or Die

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      No, I'm simply telling you a story about Charlie O'. He's the only owner I have stories for because he is one of the two owners my friend knew in his baseball days.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Originally posted by SABR Matt
                        I wouldn't call his 1976 "GREAT"...but he was very good.
                        An outfielder (not a C or SS) with a 77 BA+ and a 96 SLG+?
                        Mythical SF Chronicle scouting report: "That Jeff runs like a deer. Unfortunately, he also hits AND throws like one." I am Venus DeMilo - NO ARM! I can play like a big leaguer, I can field like Luzinski, run like Lombardi. The secret to managing is keeping the ones who hate you away from the undecided ones. I am a triumph of quantity over quality. I'm almost useful, every village needs an idiot.
                        Good traders: MadHatter(2), BoofBonser26, StormSurge

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          SLG != power...ISOP = power. He had above average power, WAAAAAYYY above average plate discipline, was still a decent fielder...the only failing was the low batting average...and yes...his other assets were enough to make him a better than average offensive player in 1976.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            In 1976 he was a slightly above average offensive player.
                            Buck O'Neil: The Monarch of Baseball

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Allard Baird is not only dumber than a bag of hammers...he's just as painful to deal with...LOL

                              (sorry...just had to comment on your sig)

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X