CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com
New! Search comments:
(NOTE: Relevance, Author, and Article are not applicable for comment searches)
Great choice for the Hall and a big win for Houston
Again, similar to an earlier piece on how BP writers voted, there seems to be a strange group-think at BP that everyone needs to follow the same thought process (Jaffes WAR model) or they are wrong. You guys are looking more and more like global warming theorists who won't countenance any other models but their own.
Jaffes model clearly does not deal with the character clause ( a requirement for choosing members). Other writers in the private ballots are factoring that in. And let's remember the private ballots are 60% of the electorate, not some fringe group.
Even if you don't have hate for the Roiders, you need to look at stats of people in that era relative to what others were doing. Bagwell looks like a power hitter across generations but in his era somewhat pedestrian.
Look at Edmonds next year. He will probably get no more than 10% of vote. If you strip all the Roiders from his era jimmy ballgame looks like one of the best players of his generation but it's now hidden.
Getting 7 people into hall with 75% agreement is amazing. There nothing wrong with the process.
Its not at all clear to me that it was condoned by MLB. The admissions by Canseco and others as to how this activity was carried out (in secret, usually with third party suppliers)as well as everyone's behavior of hiding it and not talking about it before, during or after indicates it was a known bad activity and depending on the drug, illegal.
Most officials chalked it up to weight training. Whether that was a convenient curtain to hide behind, I don't know, but it certainly wasn't the training staff and team doctors medicating these guys.
And I still don't get what's wrong with penalizing "only the few". That's how the real world works. some people lie, rob and steal and get caught and others don't. It doesn't mean you conclude that the behavior is ok. What is it about Palmeiro, Bonds, Clemens, Petitte, Sheffield, McGwire that you don't know?
if you want to say that you don't have the goods on bagwell, piazza, biggio, thomas, etc, that seems perfectly fine.
and finally, it seems that this group of writers could find a statistical way to show which players are likely to have been roiders. you have data before and after the roid cycle, you have enough data on players who did use and how it impacted their performance and aging curves, shouldn't you be able to model who is likely to have used based on performance outside the norm?
I don't think you don't care. I think you can't be bothered to spend any time on it which is odd given the time all of you spend dissecting every other piece of baseball minutae ( and I mean that in a positive vein). PED usage dramatically changed the playing field more than any other thing in baseball history since they banned the spitball.
So the arguments fall into the following categories
1. Who cares about statistics ? Interesting response on a baseball prospectus website
2. I drink coffee, so I don't care ( everyone does it argument ) and its corrolary - Ty Cobb was a racist
3. I don't know who else cheated massively so I won't penalize the obvious cheaters
4 I don't want to think about this, so I wont
I'm always surprised that the sabr community is unconcerned about PEDs and older writers have a big issue with it. Seems the sabr community doesn't care about cheating and more importantly doesn't care much for the purity of the data. By giving bonds and others a pass, it screws guys like mcgriff/mussina who would otherwise have a great story. It so makes cross-generation comparisons very hard. Basically PEDS wrecked the data sets for 20 years but no one seems to care.
Seems like the older guys wouldn't give a hoot much like JFK got a pass from the press on womanizing but Clinton didn't, but they seem to hate the Roiders.
The obvious answer is to leave Clemens and Bonds off until the overhang clears so that raines/trammel/schlling etc get some momemtum. Also allows you to keep sosa/mcgwire, sheffield and walker on the ballot. In a couple years you can start pushing again for the bonds/clemens.
It looks like at least five guys on this ballot and maybe six will be in within 2 years which should largely solve the problem since the remaining guys are borderline anyhow.
Pleasantly surprised to see Kelly in the Top 10. This will be a key year for him and with the cardinals needing to start thinking about the future, his development couldn't happen fast enough.
Huge number of starting pitchers on this list explains the Shelby Miller trade
there are plenty of players who swing after 6 straight balls on the Cardinals. That's just something he has learned by watching.
The running play was pretty borderline but I take your point.
ok, you got me
four first names was a good line.
Great trades for birdos. Ramsey, Clark and Kelly for Lackey and Masterson AND Taveras gets a full shot at starting. Cards lost nothing they couldn't replace, will likely sign Masterson to a long term deal and get Lackey all next year at 500K plus a QO.
Worse outcome is that they can trade Lackey next year for the equivalent of Craig/Kelly and get parts that fit their long term needs much better than Craig/Kelly can.
You have to be pretty interesting/good to be mentioned as a throwaway 50 years later. Syd Barrett indeed.
the bad managing on both sides was unbelievable. Craig not called on to hit with bases loaded in fourth with a deep, deep bullpen?
Workman batting and then immediately being pulled
Did anyone make a good call last night? maybe the double-switch that put Wong in the game and moved the pitcher's spot in the order.
This is correct. It is an article arguing for a different definition of obstruction. The actual definition fits this play PERFECTLY. Being uncertain here is the strange place to be. I would be hard-pressed to find a controversial WS call where the umpires were so good at interpreting the rules -- they usually get it wrong
Did you look at stars/superstars vs average players? If I were a betting man, I would think the cream of the crop plays better with more experience (i.e. the Carlos Beltran effect).
That is quite a review. The biggest takeaway for me is that the Cards won't have homes for all of these players and that some kind of package deal for Stanton would still leave them with a deep system. Cards can replace pujols and Marlins get a treasure trove of major league regulars.
Beckett and Crawford clearing waivers is not surprising. Gonzalez was labeled as instigator of the Valentine uprising (which in retrospect may now have been a plant by upper management).
If you look like a cancer, teams won't take you especially if you have a long term contract.
Prior to the Valentine story, he might have been claimed, but not after.
I agree that I remember thinking that Carter was a Hall of Famer when I saw him play.
Can we get Simmons into the Hall now. He was every bit as good in my opinion
Jay, my favorite time of year. Thanks for all your hard work. I love all the analysis. I always feel for the guys that get no votes. They get trashed on so many sites as not being any good. All these guys were good -- even Tony Womack had a great year for the Cards. You do a nice job of celebrating them for the feat of even being considered for the Hall of Fame.
Was excited to see Radke get a couple of votes. Always thought he was much under-rated.
So is Kaat going in next time around? I personally would like to see it. I've never been a peak guy. I think you win 283 games in the majors, you should have a seat in the Hall
Jim Kaat with 10 votes. Any thoughts on this?
If they are going to do this, and no doubt they will if there is more revenue to be had, then I'd like to see them do four things:
1. shorten regular season back to 154
2. Add 10-15 day-night doubleheaders (expands rosters accordingly)to further shrink time lines
3. set up a round robin league playoff format to determine champion so that everyone plays everyone and best record goes
4. remove off-days so that the game strategy in playoffs is same as regular season
very interesting article -- more of these
Interesting ballot. Always been a Larry Walker fan. Complete ballplayer. I hope he gets in the 30% range so she can start the climb to induction.
CK -- the conventional wisdom is that no matter how bad ryan's offense is, he will always generate positive WAR, therefore he's worth a lot. Seems to me when you have an atrocious hitter, positive WAR based only on defenseive metrics must be misleading. And it is proven out by teams refusing to play no-hit shortstops over long periods of time -- what is the right way to evaluate someone like Ryan? Everyone in St. Louis is upset about the trade -- but is he really worth more than what we got for him?
how does aaron miles not make this list?
Nice article -- very helpful
What are the statistics like for top 10% of the major leaguers? That is, what are the equivalent statistics for the A-rods, Pujols, Jeters, Mauers? I assume they get in early, maybe peak early, and then hold their peak for quite a while. This is the most interesting group for me because these are the guys that get 5-8 year contracts.
I like saving the first ballot hall of famers for the inner circle. I think the Alomar vote was suprisingly strong --was expecting a high 50%. I think waiting a year makes sense. Ultimately the decision is binary and Blyleven in year 15 is the same as Alomar in year 2, but I think first ballot players should be special.
Why so dismissive of Raines? And you choose Mattingly. Wow -- how does something like that happen at BP
Jay, nice article as always -- I really enjoy reading these discussions. My only quibble is that something has to be wrong if Robin Ventura is close to being a Hall of Famer. Doesn't pass the smell test to me. I watched him play many games for the Sox and don't ever remember thinking Hall of Famer.
Sportswriters do carry a grudge, but I'm ok with holding alomar out for a few years as a result. What he did was completely out of bounds and I'm glad he apologized, but apologies only go so far -- he never should have done it and I think it goes to the character issue.
A few things about umpires:
1. What happens when a game is protested. How does that get resolved. Has any protest ever been upheld?
2. Who is making the decisions on rain delay starts and stops?
3. What is the process for assigning umpires to teams and how does the league deal with bias issues? Didn't some umpire have it in for Earl Weaver and they had to keep him away from Oriole games.
4. Now that they are grading balls/strikes, what is the process for doing that and when do they do it --right after the game, at end of the season, before the next game where he calls balls/strikes
Silent George Hendrick. He was great for the Cardinals. He was the original "manny being manny". He would go sit on the bullpen bench during pitching changes to conserve energy and didn't have much to say to he press.
George always looked like he wanted to be anywhere but on a ballfield but he had a great arm and he was a smart hitter. He'd go up in the first inning with nobody on and two outs and wave at three curve balls over the outside corner. In a later inning with RISP, the pitcher would throw a curve on the outside corner and George would plate two with a shot to right center.
Found it. You should publicize results day/night better. Also, is there a way to track if we are voting for the same people each week. I know I will lose track -- would be interested to see if I keep voting for same people over time.
Are the Week 1 results posted somewhere or do we just have to infer from who's not back?