Robinson only played 10 seasons. He had 1518 hits, 137 home runs and 734 RBIs. These are the stats of a mediocre baseball player.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/r/robinja02.shtml
Printable View
Robinson only played 10 seasons. He had 1518 hits, 137 home runs and 734 RBIs. These are the stats of a mediocre baseball player.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/r/robinja02.shtml
Jim, Baseball Mogul Online is a completely different game from the CD/download version of Baseball Mogul. Please keep all the Baseball Mogul specific content in the Baseball Mogul: {whatever} forums.
Anyway, the ratings that the game uses are calculated from stats loaded from the Lahman database, which are the stats that are shown on Baseball-Reference. There's no specific players that receive bonuses or penalties specifically for that player, so if you believe that Jackie Robinson specifically is overrated then every player in the game who has had similar performance to Robinson are also overrated.
Perhaps he's talking in general, not about the ratings the game gives him.
In which case, I have a bone to pick. You quoted three counting stats, therefore, they are dependant on playing time. One by one now.
Hits - Hits mean nothing if not put into context. Sure he had "only" 1518 hits, but it came out to a .311 batting average. Pretty good. When Barry Bonds batted .370, he had 149 hits that season. Players that walk more also have less hits due to less at bats ending on contact.
Home runs - He averaged about 14 per season, decent output, considering he's a second basemen...
RBI - He averaged 73 per season, again, very good considering he's a second basemen. Also, RBI are highly dependent on who bats in front of you, and where you are in the lineup.
Now, look beyond those three stats. His career batting line (avg/obp/slg) was .311/.409/.474, VERY good. It comes out to an OPS+ of 132. OPS+ is OPS adjusted for the league and park, where average is 100. He was a very above average hitter considering his league and park.
He hit for average and he drew walks. He was incredibly difficult to strike out. He either put the ball in play or drew a walk. That's a VERY good palyer.
Even given all that, you have to consider his position. Second base is and always has been weak offensively. Robinson was a good hitter independent of position. Factor in position, and Robinson was truly a great hitter.
I would tend to agree with you that he is a little overrated in the history books, but to most that is personal opinion.
Yes he was one of the better 2B that we have seen, but I personally don't think that means he is a hall of famer, but then again, that is personal opinion. Just because you are the best hitter at a position that is filled with nothing but mediocre hitters doesn't mean all that much to me.
You can't deny he was very talented and meant a lot to his team, those are things that you can't really measure with "ratings". I haven't looked at him in the game so I'm not sure how he is rated, but I would tend to think he is rated fairly against others with similar stats.
10 seasons, 6 of which were over a .900 OPS. His total career OPS of .884 leaves him in the top 100 of all time. Though he only played 10 years, if you take his average stats and figure he could've played 20, then you're looking at a guy who probably finished with over 3000 hits and 300+ home runs
He was a very good hitter, compare him today with someone like Derek Jeter (career OPS .852), a guy who's only cracked the .900 barrier twice.
Though the very fact that you're using HRs and RBIs to rate ball players shows that you've got a lot to learn about rating players.
He was a good hitter no matter what position you compare him too.Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbarr
I don't get this reasoning though. The up-the-middle positions (c,2b,ss,cf) are notoriously weaker on offense than the corner positions. A first basemen who hits .280 with 20 home runs is going to be one of the weaker offensive first basemen. Play him at short stop, and he's an above-average guy. Position definitely has to be taken into account when looking at a player's offensive output.
See, here's the thing. While another player could have Jackie's exact career and not make it, Robinson made it not only on the virtue of his outstanding (but short) career, but also because he broke the color barrier. Here's another thing to keep in mind - if it wasn't for blacks not being allowed to play baseball, Robinson might've started 5 or 6 years earlier...
Some outstanding players don't have long careers. Sandy Koufax is an example. You can't judge Robinson just by his hitting stats. Every time he got on base he was a threat to steal, even home. This of course made it easier for those who followed him to hit. He was an exciting player who deserves the accolades.
:eek: :eek: :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbarr
Overrated in the History books.....The Man Broke The Major League Ban of Players of Color!
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD
That has absolutely nothing to do with the level at which he played the game. With that thinking the guy could have been a career .220 hitter and yet you would still call him one of the greatest players to ever play the game. Doesn't make much sense there.
Okay, now explain one reason why they can't hit at the same level as the other positions? Play a 1B at Shortstop and he isn't above average because he probably can't field the ball. I know the argument is that there is much more strain put on these guys defensively and that is why they don't put up the numbers, but then again hitting is hitting. I don't care what position you play, the rules are the same for everyone that steps in to the batter's box, at least they were the last time I checked :)Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Yes it does. While you can't overrate him for it, going up to the plate every day and having 'you know what' said to you at every at-bat. Being treated like a 2nd class citizen by the fans can and I'm sure did affect how he played the game. It wasn't just your usual razzing of opposing players.Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbarr
I lived in Brooklyn in the 40's and 50's.
I saw Jackie Robinson play at Ebbets Field.
He was the most exciting baseball player I ever saw or have seen to this day.
The only one who was up there with him was Willie Mays.
Jackie did things on the ball field that can not be set down in "statistics".
The electric feeling that went through the park when he was on the bases, particularly third base was incredible.
Given the conditions he was forced to play under his statistics are remarkable.
1st....Jackie Robinson the man was not overrated in the history books. Period. What he did, what he went through as a person deserves every ounce of respect and is not overrated.
2nd....Jackie Robinson the player....He brought something to the game. He was a part....a vital part of 4 WS championships. He united his team. His stats should not be compared to players of today. My personal opinion is that each player being considered for the Hall should only be compared to players of his generation. In that respect Jackie Jackie was the 1947 ROY, 1949 National league MVP and a 6 time All Star in a 10 year career. He led in OBP in 1952 and SB in 1947 and 1949!
His lifetime .311 BA most players would kill for!
Why is this in the mods forum?
Jackie Robinson was 28 years old when he broke into the Majors in 1947. He still managed six years with more than 100 runs scored (a 7th with 99) and six years with an OBP over .400. He also hit over .300 six times including a batting championship, and he twice led the National League in Bill James's statistical category Total Player Rating.
Did I mention that he only played in more than 125 of his team's games 7 times?
If you want an overrated HOFer, I give you Ozzie Smith.
:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by bjohn13
Why's everyone picking on the infielders :confused: