Tweet
I've always been a big believer in league quality adjustments when ranking players and pitchers. My question is, has there ever been any good studies done that tries to figure out how much the quality of play has improved, if even at all? What about stats? Is there a stat out there that does take something like league quality into account?
-
-
Here's a thought....
If you believe that the war-years(World war II) offered a lesser quality of play; then you have something to compare the following years to. -
Baseball Gauge's WAR has a timeline LQ adjustment, derived from the following study, FWIW to you:Originally posted by fenrir View Post
1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011
1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013
1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015
The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
The Top 100 Position Players In MLB HistoryComment
-
Quality has, afaik, been stated with three independent issues at heart: 1) competiveness / balance, 2) actual player skill / training and, 3) player physical ability. Modern day theorists differ on how to measure or evaluate these three in 'adjusting' for league quality.Originally posted by fenrir View Post
The Hardball Times study that Matthew C posted in the only one I've seen. Bill James also had some anecdotal verbiage on it."It's better to look good, than be good."Comment
-
Screen shot 2012-06-03 at 3.11.54 PM.png
I've seen this done a number of different ways but this thread inspired me to create my own chart related to the topic.
I queried the average OPS of all position players in the NL and compared that to the average OPS of all pitchers in the NL since 1887. The growth in the separation between the two is perhaps an indication of how much the offensive talent pool has improved over time-- assuming pitcher's hitting has remained relatively the same during that period of time.
IMAGEComment
Comment