Today is the 30th anniversary of Pete Rose's 3,000 hit, on the way to becoming baseball's all-time hit leader.
They showed some video of the hit tonight on ESPN. He hit it off Steve Rogers of the Expos, a name pretty much forgotten today, but one of the very good pitchers of the 1970s and early 1980s. Rogers made the All-Star team four times, was runner up for ROY in 1973, and finished in the top 5 in Cy Young voting three different times -- including a second place finish to Steve Carlton in 1982.
It was a road game, so no celebration: There wasn't a lot of fanfare/Nor were there many fans there/It was Montreal/After all.
Anyway, whereas now they would stop the game and celebrate, even in a road park, there was virtually nothing to mark the event. No teammates congratulating him. No opponents congratulating him. This was no Mark McGwire moment with Sosa hugging him (which I personally found disgusting).
But most interesting of all, Tony Perez, Rose's teammate on the Big Red Machine, was playing first base for Montreal. Rose trotted down to first and stood there. And so did Perez. Stand there. Ready for the next pitch. No congratulations. Just standing there. After a couple of minutes of both of them just standing there, Rose reached over and patted Perez' chest, and gave him the half-hug, with Perez sort of returning the half-hug...call it a quarter-hug.
I think the lack of general celebration is a product of the times. I think the lack of Perez' celebration is something deeper, like maybe Rose was always an asshole? Maybe? Not exactly far-fetched.
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Monday, May 05, 2008
Monday, February 04, 2008
Anyone Can Write A Baseball Book
Tonight at Borders I read the Introduction and first chapter of a book called "Stat One" by Craig Messmer. The book consists of a ranking of historical players, by position, with some commentary.
Basically the facts and figures associated with the players have been seen in countless other places. The alleged innovation is a new stat that the author claims best represents hitting ability, or value, or both...I'm not sure. Best I can tell, he does not actually use the new stat to rank the players, so the rankings end up being just another guy's opinion.
The new stat is this: (Net Runs + Net Runs + Complete Bases)/Plate Appearances.
Net Runs are: RBI + R - HR
Complete Bases are: Total Bases + BB + HBP + SB - CS
That's it. That's the Holy Grail stat the book considers "A New System For Rating Baseball's All-Time Greatest Players." He calls it the P/E. The "P" is for production and the "E" is for efficiency.
He does almost nothing to justify the stat. He first criticizes production stats because they are dependent on other players. He then criticizes efficiency stats because they do not translate to runs. Fair criticisms, but nothing new.
How does he solve the problem? He creates a new stat that is two-thirds dependent on other players and divides it by plate appearances to produce an efficiency stat that does not translate to actual runs produced. In other words, his stat is comprised of exactly the parts that he says don't work in existing statistical methods. Then he makes it worse by combining them all.
Sabermetricians might ask (among many other things) "Why count net runs twice?" His response? To even things out so that Complete Bases does not dominate the outcome.
P/E seems to have no mathematical or theoretical justification. It's just a guy taking a bunch of traditional stats and combining them in a way that hasn't been published before. There's a good reason a stat this simple hasn't already been published.
Add, subtract, divide. Mix and match. See how many combinations you can come up with. It doesn't have to mean anything. It will sell.
I'm thinking of (Height (inches) + Weight (pounds) + Total Bases)/(Plate Appearances - Strikeouts). Perhaps I'll publish a list of the greatest players of all time.
Basically the facts and figures associated with the players have been seen in countless other places. The alleged innovation is a new stat that the author claims best represents hitting ability, or value, or both...I'm not sure. Best I can tell, he does not actually use the new stat to rank the players, so the rankings end up being just another guy's opinion.
The new stat is this: (Net Runs + Net Runs + Complete Bases)/Plate Appearances.
Net Runs are: RBI + R - HR
Complete Bases are: Total Bases + BB + HBP + SB - CS
That's it. That's the Holy Grail stat the book considers "A New System For Rating Baseball's All-Time Greatest Players." He calls it the P/E. The "P" is for production and the "E" is for efficiency.
He does almost nothing to justify the stat. He first criticizes production stats because they are dependent on other players. He then criticizes efficiency stats because they do not translate to runs. Fair criticisms, but nothing new.
How does he solve the problem? He creates a new stat that is two-thirds dependent on other players and divides it by plate appearances to produce an efficiency stat that does not translate to actual runs produced. In other words, his stat is comprised of exactly the parts that he says don't work in existing statistical methods. Then he makes it worse by combining them all.
Sabermetricians might ask (among many other things) "Why count net runs twice?" His response? To even things out so that Complete Bases does not dominate the outcome.
P/E seems to have no mathematical or theoretical justification. It's just a guy taking a bunch of traditional stats and combining them in a way that hasn't been published before. There's a good reason a stat this simple hasn't already been published.
Add, subtract, divide. Mix and match. See how many combinations you can come up with. It doesn't have to mean anything. It will sell.
I'm thinking of (Height (inches) + Weight (pounds) + Total Bases)/(Plate Appearances - Strikeouts). Perhaps I'll publish a list of the greatest players of all time.
Monday, December 03, 2007
Marvin Miller and the Hall of Fame
For once I agree with something Donald Fehr said:
I'm not crazy about putting non-players in the Hall of Fame, but since that's already been established, I think Miller ought to be in. (Anyone who cares deeply about baseball should read Miller's book "A Whole Different Ballgame" but copies are scarce.)
It would be somewhat strange, however, to elect both Bowie Kuhn and Marvin Miller on the same ballot, since they were at each other's throats. You'll notice that if you read Miller's book, or Kuhn's for that matter. But Kuhn has already died before getting the glory. In fact, everyone elected today, other than Dick Williams, has already died.
The aging Miller ought to be elected while he can enjoy the moment.
"It was very disappointing to learn this morning that, once again, Marvin Miller was not elected to the Hall of Fame. Over the entire scope of the last half of the 20th century, no other individual had as much influence on the game of baseball as did Marvin Miller."
I'm not crazy about putting non-players in the Hall of Fame, but since that's already been established, I think Miller ought to be in. (Anyone who cares deeply about baseball should read Miller's book "A Whole Different Ballgame" but copies are scarce.)
It would be somewhat strange, however, to elect both Bowie Kuhn and Marvin Miller on the same ballot, since they were at each other's throats. You'll notice that if you read Miller's book, or Kuhn's for that matter. But Kuhn has already died before getting the glory. In fact, everyone elected today, other than Dick Williams, has already died.
The aging Miller ought to be elected while he can enjoy the moment.
Friday, August 10, 2007
Cleveland's Hall of Fame Heritage
The Indians will be wearing #14 today, to honor Larry Doby. That's great, although it might upset Peter Bjarkman that they aren't wearing Clemente's number. :)
It is happening in conjuction with Hall of Fame Heritage weekend in Cleveland. At first I thought the Doby event would be watered down by the names of those being inducted into the Cleveland Indians Hall of Fame: Charles Nagy, Andre Thornton, Mike Garcia and Jim Bagby Sr. But to be fair, I decided to look at them individually.
Charles Nagy was essentially a major league average pitcher. He had some all-star quality seasons in 92, 94 and 96, but take those seasons away and there isn't much to say. He did pitch in Cleveland for 12 seasons. More importantly, he pitched for Cleveland during their ascendancy from decades-long doormats to frequent contenders. I think he is a borderline pick for a team Hall of Fame, but he may have a special relationship with Clevelanders.
Thornton was a good hitter in his day. Not an incredible hitter, considering he was penciled in as DH more than any other spot, just ahead of his games at 1b. But good. He spent 10 seasons in Cleveland. This selection makes sense to me for a team Hall of Fame, though he would probably not make even a Hall of the Very Good on a baseball-wide scale.
Mike Garcia is a much stronger case. He spent 12 seasons in Cleveland and until age got him, was one of the best pitchers in the American League. He has an almost .600 win percentage. Easily a team Hall of Famer. He was on the '54 pennant team. The only surprise is that it took this long. He retired 36 years ago, and I'm betting that Early Wynn, Bob Feller and Bob Lemon (his teammates in '54) are already in the team Hall of Fame (not to mention Cooperstown, with another '54 teammate, Hal Newhouser). Doby was on that team too.
Jim Bagby, Sr. pitched for 9 years in the bigs, from 1912 to 1923. Seven of those years were with Cleveland. Based on his stats, he appears to have been a pretty good pitcher, but not for very long. He had two or three all-star caliber seasons. His best was in 1917, when he had an ERA under 2.00 over nearly 321 innings and won 23 games. Of course, the league was a bit watered down by World War I, so he may have been preying on weak hitters. Not a strong selection.
All in all, I guess it isn't as bad as I first thought. Garcia is an excellent pick, Thornton a good pick, and Nagy and Bagby, Sr. just so so. I guess they couldn't use Manny, or Thome, or Lofton, since they are all playing for other teams. Albert Belle ought to be in there, but I bet that would be an unpopular decision.
I wonder, though, if Mike Hargrove is in the Indians Hall of Fame. I couldn't find a list of Indians Hall of Famers on their web site, though there was an alphabetical list of the 100 greatest Indians. All of the players named in this post are on the Top 100 list.
If Hargrove isn't in the Indians Hall of Fame, he should be -- both as a manager and a player -- and he probably needs the emotional boost.
It is happening in conjuction with Hall of Fame Heritage weekend in Cleveland. At first I thought the Doby event would be watered down by the names of those being inducted into the Cleveland Indians Hall of Fame: Charles Nagy, Andre Thornton, Mike Garcia and Jim Bagby Sr. But to be fair, I decided to look at them individually.
Charles Nagy was essentially a major league average pitcher. He had some all-star quality seasons in 92, 94 and 96, but take those seasons away and there isn't much to say. He did pitch in Cleveland for 12 seasons. More importantly, he pitched for Cleveland during their ascendancy from decades-long doormats to frequent contenders. I think he is a borderline pick for a team Hall of Fame, but he may have a special relationship with Clevelanders.
Thornton was a good hitter in his day. Not an incredible hitter, considering he was penciled in as DH more than any other spot, just ahead of his games at 1b. But good. He spent 10 seasons in Cleveland. This selection makes sense to me for a team Hall of Fame, though he would probably not make even a Hall of the Very Good on a baseball-wide scale.
Mike Garcia is a much stronger case. He spent 12 seasons in Cleveland and until age got him, was one of the best pitchers in the American League. He has an almost .600 win percentage. Easily a team Hall of Famer. He was on the '54 pennant team. The only surprise is that it took this long. He retired 36 years ago, and I'm betting that Early Wynn, Bob Feller and Bob Lemon (his teammates in '54) are already in the team Hall of Fame (not to mention Cooperstown, with another '54 teammate, Hal Newhouser). Doby was on that team too.
Jim Bagby, Sr. pitched for 9 years in the bigs, from 1912 to 1923. Seven of those years were with Cleveland. Based on his stats, he appears to have been a pretty good pitcher, but not for very long. He had two or three all-star caliber seasons. His best was in 1917, when he had an ERA under 2.00 over nearly 321 innings and won 23 games. Of course, the league was a bit watered down by World War I, so he may have been preying on weak hitters. Not a strong selection.
All in all, I guess it isn't as bad as I first thought. Garcia is an excellent pick, Thornton a good pick, and Nagy and Bagby, Sr. just so so. I guess they couldn't use Manny, or Thome, or Lofton, since they are all playing for other teams. Albert Belle ought to be in there, but I bet that would be an unpopular decision.
I wonder, though, if Mike Hargrove is in the Indians Hall of Fame. I couldn't find a list of Indians Hall of Famers on their web site, though there was an alphabetical list of the 100 greatest Indians. All of the players named in this post are on the Top 100 list.
If Hargrove isn't in the Indians Hall of Fame, he should be -- both as a manager and a player -- and he probably needs the emotional boost.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Bonds vs. Aaron...in a different way
I was watching Tim Lincecum bat (not pretty) and they showed Bonds sitting in the dugout chewing sunflower seeds. I wondered whether he saw a guy like Lincecum at the plate and laughed, or whether he has seen so much that it really doesn't affect him. Somehow, that segued into me wondering whether Barry ever sat in the dugout and enjoyed a teammate's at-bat, and from there, whether Barry every really played with any hitter he could admire. Only Jeff Kent immediately came to mind, and more slowly, Bobby Bonilla.
I decided to make a chart of the best players Barry played with as a teammate, with the same for Hank Aaron. I had the impression that neither player had a lot of talent surrounding him. I've ranked them based on nothing more than my own impressions...I have not verified the rankings via Win Shares, WARP or any other system.
Hitter List
Pitcher List
Fielder List
Barry's hitting teammate list is a little better than expected. Still, there's only one probable Hall of Famer (Kent) and a couple of borderline guys (Clark and Vizquel), one of whom is there for defense alone. Nobody for Barry to "admire" since he and Kent didn't do a lot of admiring of each other. Barry's pitching teammates were not impressive, although Nen and Nathan were/are outstanding.
Aaron's hitting list is much better. Mathews is one of the best hitters in history and Slaughter is also in the Hall of Fame. Torre and Cepeda probably should be. Many have also argued for Darrell Evans' inclusion. Until you get to #9 on the list, Barry's teammates don't win the battle.
Aaron also wins the pitching list, with three bona fide Hall of Famers. I'd say Aaron's teammates win 1 through 6. Barry's defensive stalwarts might be better, though this could be because I'm less familiar with the defensive reputation of players in the 50s and 60s.
Interesting side note: Aaron played with a ton of future managers: Torre, LaRussa, Oates, Davey Johnson, Dusty Baker, Felipe Alou, Gaston, Dark, Deron Johnson, Billy Martin, Joe Morgan, Red Schoendienst and Chuck Tanner, as well as two of the most prominent hitting coaches in the last 30 years, Charlie Lau and Walt Hriniak (neither of whom could hit). And those are the just the guys whose names I recognized as managers.
I decided to make a chart of the best players Barry played with as a teammate, with the same for Hank Aaron. I had the impression that neither player had a lot of talent surrounding him. I've ranked them based on nothing more than my own impressions...I have not verified the rankings via Win Shares, WARP or any other system.
Hitter List
# Bonds Aaron
1. W.Clark Mathews
2. Kent J. Torre
3. Strawberry Cepeda
4. E. Davis Adcock
5. M. Alou D. Baker
6. Bonilla Slaughter
7. K. Gibson D. Evans
8. Burks F. Alou
9. M. Williams Carty
10. Van Slyke B. Thomson
11. Galarraga D. Johnson
Pitcher List
# Bonds Aaron
1. R. Reuschel Spahn
2. Nen P. Niekro
3. Hershiser Wilhelm
4. Nathan Pappas
5. R. Beck S. Miller
6. Righetti Antonelli
7. Reuss
Fielder List
# Bonds Aaron
1. Vizquel Schoendienst
2. J.T. Snow McMillan
3. D. Lewis Logan
4. Grissom
Barry's hitting teammate list is a little better than expected. Still, there's only one probable Hall of Famer (Kent) and a couple of borderline guys (Clark and Vizquel), one of whom is there for defense alone. Nobody for Barry to "admire" since he and Kent didn't do a lot of admiring of each other. Barry's pitching teammates were not impressive, although Nen and Nathan were/are outstanding.
Aaron's hitting list is much better. Mathews is one of the best hitters in history and Slaughter is also in the Hall of Fame. Torre and Cepeda probably should be. Many have also argued for Darrell Evans' inclusion. Until you get to #9 on the list, Barry's teammates don't win the battle.
Aaron also wins the pitching list, with three bona fide Hall of Famers. I'd say Aaron's teammates win 1 through 6. Barry's defensive stalwarts might be better, though this could be because I'm less familiar with the defensive reputation of players in the 50s and 60s.
Interesting side note: Aaron played with a ton of future managers: Torre, LaRussa, Oates, Davey Johnson, Dusty Baker, Felipe Alou, Gaston, Dark, Deron Johnson, Billy Martin, Joe Morgan, Red Schoendienst and Chuck Tanner, as well as two of the most prominent hitting coaches in the last 30 years, Charlie Lau and Walt Hriniak (neither of whom could hit). And those are the just the guys whose names I recognized as managers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)