like an Electrolux. Had to put ESPN on mute, couldn't listen to him prattle on any longer. Yeah I know, nothing new here, just felt like saying it. And in other news, Confucious say... "Baseball is wrong. Man with four balls cannot walk".
Printable View
like an Electrolux. Had to put ESPN on mute, couldn't listen to him prattle on any longer. Yeah I know, nothing new here, just felt like saying it. And in other news, Confucious say... "Baseball is wrong. Man with four balls cannot walk".
Heh. Living in the New York area, I get to watch the game on YES. Michael Kay, Al Leiter, and John Flaherty are a little more tolerable. :)
But man, this is one LONG freakin game. It's been 2 and a half hours and they're in the 5th. Jeez.
In Joe Morgan news, it seems somebody else may be doing his chats this year! Yesterday's is equally level-headed. FJM hasn't done their review of it yet, but it's pretty scary!
Typical Sundays game was only 8-5 and took 4 hours ...
Post another one for Lugo, 6 errors so far on pace for a quality 60 this year.
Although more on target If you had only one bullet which color man would you take out.. Morgan or McCarver?
Quote:
Yeah I know, nothing new here, just felt like saying it.
And I don't think its said enough. Joe sucks, Joe sucks, Joe sucks, Joe sucks, Joe sucks.
As an announcer!Quote:
Originally Posted by Reade
As a baseball player, he was amazing...and a player that Joe the Announcer might not appreciate much if he played today.
The big red machine was before my time, but amazing might be pushing it alittle bit, plus hitting in front of Foster, Perez, Bench, Griffey probably made him look better than he really was.Quote:
As a baseball player, he was amazing.
Looking at post season numbers they weren't real impressive either. Batted .135 in 7 league championships(27 games) and batted .235 in 4 World Series(23 games).
really ? 2 MVPS, top10 in mvp voting 5 straight years, 10 allstars an 392 career OBP and 5 consecutive Gold gloves and 10th alltime in steals all sound like an amazing player, who cares who else was in the lineup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reade
Career .271/.392/.427 hitter, 132 OPS+, 689 stolen bases at an 81% success rate. All as a second basemen. His 132 OPS+ ties him for 5th with Jackie Robinson among second basemen all time, behind Hornsby, Collins, and Lajoie. Morgan was also a very good defensive second basemen. His 1972-1977 peak with OPS+'s of 149, 154, 159, 169, 187, and 138 is outstanding for a second basemen. Bill James ranked him as the best second basemen of all-time. I think I'd rank Hornsby and Collins above him, but I'd put him 3rd ahead of Lajoie. Even ranking him behind Lajoie, there's no doubt in my mind that he was an amazing player and one of the all-time greatest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reade
I got to see him live when he was past his prime with the A's against the Mariners. Was a great game, got to see him hit a home run, and Dave Kingman hit 3 (including a grand slam). I did get to see him on TV in his prime, though, and he was amazing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Hate to divert from the important topic of Joe Morgan's suckitude as an announcer, but back in the time of Hornsby, Collins, and Lajoie, wasn't second base primarily an offensive position, where you put one of your best hitters? If that's the case, then Morgan would have to be the best second baseman of all time in the sense of the current responsibilities of a second baseman -- to be a good fielder as well as a hitter.
--Pet
Speaking as one who is old enough to remember Joe Morgan as a player, he could certainly hit but that spastic elbow twitch he had in the batter's box was just as annoying as his current-day rambles on ESPN. That twitch reminded me of a horse using his tail to swat flies off his ***. Lots of players have their routines they go through in the batter's box, but Morgan's was one of the weirdest I can remember seeing.
I would put him 3rd or 4th all-time behind Hornsby, Lajoie, and Sandberg.
That's true. If VORP went back that far, we could tell, but unfortunately, it doesn't. WARP does though, and that also take into account defense, so let's see.Quote:
Originally Posted by petrel
Career WARP3:
Hornsby: 159.1
Lajoie: 160.1
Collins: 174.1
Morgan: 158.4
Career Peak WARP3 (best 5 seasons):
Hornsby: 68.1
Lajoie: 63.0
Collins: 64.8
Morgan: 66.1
Either way you slice it, it's **** close.
You'd put Sandberg ahead of Eddie Collins and Joe Morgan? That better be your fandom speaking, and not based on any objective analysis. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Reade
For comparison's sake, Ryne Sandberg career WARP3 is 107, and his best 5 years are 53.5.
Since Morgan thou, I would rank them.
Career...
- Sandburg
- Alomar
- Whitaker
- Biggio
- Jeff Kent
- Baegra
{edited for career not peak }
1) BiggioQuote:
Originally Posted by boomboom
2) Sandberg
3) Alomar
4) Kent
5) Whitaker
6) Baerga
is how I'd rank those guys based on peak.
WARP3 sees those guys, using their best 5 seasons:
1) Alomar 56.4
2) Sandberg 53.5
3) Biggio 52.2
4) Kent 51.6
5) Whitaker 46.2
6) Baerga 43
sorry, I mean't career wise.. ;)
Sandberg had a Better Peak than Biggio....84-90
Career, WARP3:
1) Alomar 132.5
2) Whitaker 128.7
3) Biggio 120.9
4) Kent 113.9
5) Sandberg 107.0
6) Baerga 55.1
Sandberg's best years came in 1991 and 1992, using WARP3, due to high defensive marks those seasons, plus career high OBP's.Quote:
Originally Posted by boomboom
Defensive Stats have no base, because they can't account for everything, that is something I do hate about Defensive stats and why I don't care for WARP3.
Defensive stats are certainly shaky, at least for historical times, and WARP3 uses the "basic" defensive stats, not any advanced range-based methods, so the defensive gripe about WARP3 is certainly legitimate, but it's still a fairly solid stat, and it does agree with you that Sandberg had a better peak than Biggio :p, but even ignoring defensive stats, Sandberg's peak was 1989-1992, 4 straight seasons with OPS+ of 134 or better. His 1984 and 1985 were outstanding seasons, as well, but they were followed by 3 solid but not spectacular seasons, which is why it's hard to make a case that his peak was 1984-1990, rather than 1989-1992.Quote:
Originally Posted by boomboom
Rogers Hornsby was the greatest second basemen of all times. Sandberg is not even in the top five.
This depends. He was undoubtedly and without question the best hitting second basemen of all time. However, by all accounts I've read, he was the closest you can be to "brutal" defensively without being a downright butcher. He didn't provide a ton of baserunning value either. Those two things are what give Morgan and Collins legitimate cases, They were prolific basestealers that stole at high rates, while also playing good defense - brilliant in Collins' case by all accounts,Quote:
Originally Posted by tigeraholic
It's a shame Niehaus is only human. :(
NO HE IS GOD!Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Owens
What is WARP3????Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Ugh, Sabrmetrics are so damned frustrating! Why can't people use simple stats like BA/HR/RBI's for hitters and Wins/ERA/Strikeouts/Opp. BA for pitchers?
Wins Above Replacement Player.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Because BA/HR/RBI tells you next to nothing about a hitter's offensive value.Quote:
Ugh, Sabrmetrics are so damned frustrating! Why can't people use simple stats like BA/HR/RBI's for hitters and Wins/ERA/Strikeouts/Opp. BA for pitchers?
RBI tells you nothing of a hitter's ability. Wins tells you nothing of a pitcher's ability.
.285 AVG, 31 HR, 75 RBI
.296 AVG, 30 HR, 94 RBI
Who's better?
7-16, 3.65 ERA, 163 K in 200 IP
16-10, 2.63 ERA, 62 K in 225.2 IP
Who's better?
The short blurbs in the BP glossary don't explain much about the stat. Unfortunately, a lot of the inner workings of stats like WARP aren't publically available. There's some stuff, like this on VORP (Value Over Replacement Player), which is a part of the offensive component of WARP, but the full formula of WARP isn't available.Quote:
Originally Posted by yankee hater
if the full formula of WARP isn't available then don't use it because nobody knows how you got the numbers...
welcome back :pQuote:
Originally Posted by yankee hater
I would have gone for "whoever is represented by Scott Boras", but yours is not bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by yankee hater
If it was coming from any old hoohoo on the street, I'd agree completely. However, coming from a well-known, long-running organization with a history of great statistical breakthroughs, you can be pretty confidant that they aren't making things up or haphazardly slapping a stat together. They update the WARP formula yearly to incorporate new information and improve upon the old formula. They've been tweaking WARP for years.Quote:
Originally Posted by boomboom
Another test for stats is "Does what the stat say match up well with a) perception and b) other stats" and for WARP the answer is a qualified "Yes" to both a and b. Should it be used exclusively? No. Should it be completely ignored? No.
WARP3 for the first player: 10.7Quote:
.285 AVG, 31 HR, 75 RBI
.296 AVG, 30 HR, 94 RBI
Who's better?
WARP3 for the second: 11.1
This one surprised me but upon further examination, I see why. Mickey Mantle is the first player - 1959. 2007 Jimmy Rollins is the second. While Mantle was easily the better hitter (.321 EQA to Rollins' .297) and both were plus defenders (14 FRAA for Mantle, and 9 FRAA for Rollins), Rollins played every single game, and that has a ton of value, which is why Rollins was more valuable in 2007 than Mantle was in 1959.
The first player is Matt Cain in 2007. The second player is Ernie Shore in 1916. And this is a prime example of why a) won-loss record is useless in evaluating players and b) simple stats, while okay for comparing players in the same season, are utterly useless for a total evaluation of players because they give zero context.Quote:
7-16, 3.65 ERA, 163 K in 200 IP
16-10, 2.63 ERA, 62 K in 225.2 IP
Who's better?
Cain's 3.65 ERA in 2007 is better than Shore's 2.63 ERA 90 years earlier. Matt Cain's WARP3 was 6.6. Ernie Shore in 1916 was 2.2.