PDA

View Full Version : Joe Posnanski blog: 3000 Hits



redsmetz
02-17-2012, 05:07 AM
This is a fascinating blog post by Joe Posnanski on various statistical milestones (not just 3000 hits) and a look at Hall of Fame credentials.

http://joeposnanski.si.com/2012/02/16/3000-hits/

RedsBaron
02-17-2012, 06:29 AM
I read the article yesterday. As usual it was an interesting piece by Posnanski.
BTW, did you read the Bill James article on Dwight Evans that was linked in Posnanski's article? I love James, and I am sympathetic to the argument that Evans is underrated, but I didn't think that article was up to James's usual standards.

redsmetz
02-17-2012, 08:36 AM
I read the article yesterday. As usual it was an interesting piece by Posnanski.
BTW, did you read the Bill James article on Dwight Evans that was linked in Posnanski's article? I love James, and I am sympathetic to the argument that Evans is underrated, but I didn't think that article was up to James's usual standards.

I haven't read much of James, but I personally found it fascinating. Still I had to scan some of it and my eyes glazed a little over the breakdown of their stats. What I found most fascinating was taking six players all born in the same year and examining their careers as they all progressed.

More so, his mention of Evans having most of his very good years in his 30's (something he tabbed as happening in only about 5% of players), strikes me as pertinent to the discussion about Drew Stubbs and whether he can finally kick it in (although he's still just 27) - it can happen, but it's rare.

But that's digressing. For those who didn't follow the link, he compares Evans with Cesar Cedeno, Jeff Burroughs, Al Cowan, Dave Parker & Dave Winfield, all born in 1951. Here's the link directly, interesting way to have a snapshot of some particular players and their coincidental history:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7555836/an-open-letter-mlb-hall-fame-dwight-evans-rightful-place-cooperstown

Hoosier Red
02-17-2012, 05:02 PM
I find it curious that James compares his win shares to a pitcher's win and loss record. Every follower of James that I've seen argues against a pitcher's win-loss record as worthless in evaluating him.

RedlegJake
02-17-2012, 05:10 PM
I find it curious that James compares his win shares to a pitcher's win and loss record. Every follower of James that I've seen argues against a pitcher's win-loss record as worthless in evaluating him.

I agree that wins are pretty meaningless in a season to season evaluation but I think they have a lot of merit over a full career. It's a counting stat that only matters when it is evaluated over an entire career's worth of performance - any season or two or three season's is rendered meaningless by outside factors but winning 250 or 300 games takes a pretty darn good pitcher regardless of outside factors.

RedsBaron
02-17-2012, 08:07 PM
I find it curious that James compares his win shares to a pitcher's win and loss record. Every follower of James that I've seen argues against a pitcher's win-loss record as worthless in evaluating him.

That's one of the reasons I didn't find James's column to be up to his usual standards. We already have Win Shares and WAR and numerous other advanced ways to evaluate a player. I just didn't think trying to in effect convert Evans's performance to that of a pitcher's won-loss record was helpful.

George Anderson
02-17-2012, 08:31 PM
On the subject of Dwight Evans, this is a good article of why he is more worthy of the HOF than Jim Rice is.

http://www.bloodysox.com/2011/04/17/jim-rice-vs-dwight-evans/

westofyou
02-17-2012, 09:00 PM
James has changed as writer, his recent effort was a crime book called Popular Crime, which I found really interesting, however I suspect his voice has changed. It happens to all writers, but I havent found the change to be less than before, but more accepting to the grey in the world, James could 20 odd years ago, be a tad caustic. I'll have to read these tonight, I found myself pondering at bat totals earlier today, and JPoes article falls right in line with that.

757690
02-17-2012, 09:49 PM
Both Poz amd James miss what I consider to be the only criteria for a Hall of Fame member.

Was this player one of the best at his position for at least 10 years.

None of the players talked about were really ever one of the best at their positions. Maybe for one or two years, but never anythig close to a decade.

George Anderson
02-17-2012, 10:00 PM
Both Poz amd James miss what I consider to be the only criteria for a Hall of Fame member.

Was this player one of the best at his position for at least 10 years.

.



This is a really good book by Bill James called "Whatever Happened to Hall of Fame?" He does a very good job of breaking down who belongs and who doesn't.

http://www.amazon.com/Whatever-Happened-Hall-Fame-James/dp/0684800888/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329533579&sr=8-1

RedlegJake
02-17-2012, 10:38 PM
If you use the "ten years the best at his position" criteria you can knock out about two thirds of the players currently in the Hall...

RedsBaron
02-18-2012, 07:08 AM
This is a really good book by Bill James called "Whatever Happened to Hall of Fame?" He does a very good job of breaking down who belongs and who doesn't.

http://www.amazon.com/Whatever-Happened-Hall-Fame-James/dp/0684800888/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329533579&sr=8-1

It is a terrific book. I have the hardcover edition published in 1994 with the title of "The Politics of Glory."
In chapter 26 of the book, entitled "Round-Up", James discussed the then best Hall of Fame candidates by position. His list:
C-Joe Torre
1B-Orlando Cepeda
2B-Nellie Fox
3B-Ron Santo
SS-George Davis
LF-Minnie Minoso
CF-Richie Ashburn
RF-Tony Oliva
SP-Jim Kaat
SP-Don Sutton
SP-Phil Niekro
SP-Bob Caruthers
MGR-Leo Durocher
James added that of that group there were six men whom he believed should be in the HOF: Torre, Fox, Santo, Ashburn, Kaat and Niekro, "plus I would add another third baseman, Ken Boyer." Curiously, he didn't say there that Sutton should be in the HOF but in other writings James did advocate Sutton's induction.
Since James orginally published this book Cepeda, Fox, Santo, Ashburn, Sutton, Niekro and Durocher have all been inducted into the HOF.

George Anderson
02-18-2012, 12:50 PM
It is a terrific book. I have the hardcover edition published in 1994 with the title of "The Politics of Glory."
In chapter 26 of the book, entitled "Round-Up", James discussed the then best Hall of Fame candidates by position. His list:
C-Joe Torre
1B-Orlando Cepeda
2B-Nellie Fox
3B-Ron Santo
SS-George Davis
LF-Minnie Minoso
CF-Richie Ashburn
RF-Tony Oliva
SP-Jim Kaat
SP-Don Sutton
SP-Phil Niekro
SP-Bob Caruthers
MGR-Leo Durocher
James added that of that group there were six men whom he believed should be in the HOF: Torre, Fox, Santo, Ashburn, Kaat and Niekro, "plus I would add another third baseman, Ken Boyer." Curiously, he didn't say there that Sutton should be in the HOF but in other writings James did advocate Sutton's induction.
Since James orginally published this book Cepeda, Fox, Santo, Ashburn, Sutton, Niekro and Durocher have all been inducted into the HOF.

Before I got the book I was pretty confident I had a good grasp of who belonged in the HOF and who didn't. After reading the book I came to the conclusion I was pretty much clueless. I always felt Ron Santo was very much a borderline candidate and no way Ken Boyer was worthy but James convinced me Santo is very worthy as is Ken Boyer. He also made a strong case for Ted Simmons and Joe Torre (as a player). No way I would have thought before that these two are even close to being worthy of the HOF but again, James makes a strong case for them. James also did an excellent job of pointing out players who don't belong like Phil Rizzuto, Enos Slaughter and Ray Schalk. Again, before the book I thought these three were worthy of the HOF.

_Sir_Charles_
02-18-2012, 01:05 PM
Of the ones listed there, I'm most surprised by Oliva and Kaat not being in. I think they're highly overlooked.

George Anderson
02-18-2012, 01:06 PM
Of the ones listed there, I'm most surprised by Oliva and Kaat not being in. I think they're highly overlooked.

James convinced me both Kaat and Tommy John belong.

If I recall he didn't think Oliva was worthy.

westofyou
02-18-2012, 01:43 PM
James convinced me both Kaat and Tommy John belong.

If I recall he didn't think Oliva was worthy.

And he's not, he had a Vada Pinson career, real top heavy prior to age thirty and real bottom heavy after that.




Tony Oliva
.313/.361/.507/.867 Under 30
.278/.331/.390/.721 31 Plus

Vada Pinson
.294/.338/.463/.801 Under 30
.266/.300/.391/.691 31 Plus

RedsBaron
02-18-2012, 02:51 PM
One of the many things I have liked about James is his willingness to re-examine his own assumptions. In his first Historical Baseball Abstract he argued that Don Drysdale had properly been elected to the Hall of Fame, but he later concluded in "The Politics of Glory" that Drysdale did not deserve induction. I actually still lean towards James's first argument and, if I had to vote on the issue I would probably vote to include Drysdale in the HOF, but I appreciate James's honesty and openess.

757690
02-18-2012, 03:01 PM
This is a really good book by Bill James called "Whatever Happened to Hall of Fame?" He does a very good job of breaking down who belongs and who doesn't.

http://www.amazon.com/Whatever-Happened-Hall-Fame-James/dp/0684800888/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329533579&sr=8-1

Thanks. I've read it and loved it. Learned so much. :thumbup:

757690
02-18-2012, 03:05 PM
If you use the "ten years the best at his position" criteria you can knock out about two thirds of the players currently in the Hall...

Not sure it's two thirds, but whatever the number is, so be it. I think that's a fair standard for such a high honor.

George Anderson
02-18-2012, 04:52 PM
Not sure it's two thirds, but whatever the number is, so be it. I think that's a fair standard for such a high honor.

So is George Brett worthy of the HOF? He played during the same era of Mike Schmidt but Schmidt is regarded as the better player. The same goes with Roy Campanella, he played during the same era as Yogi Berra but Berra is regarded as better.

I am all for tight standards to get into the HOF but I think your standard is a little to strong IMO.

757690
02-18-2012, 05:02 PM
So is George Brett worthy of the HOF? He played during the same era of Mike Schmidt but Schmidt is regarded as the better player. The same goes with Roy Campanella, he played during the same era as Yogi Berra but Berra is regarded as better.

I am all for tight standards to get into the HOF but I think your standard is a little to strong IMO.


Was this player one of the best at his position for at least 10 years.

Not the best, just one of the best. Still allows for some judgment calls and debate.