WAR and the Hall of Fame
by jscape2000 on Dec 31, 2010 3:30 PM EST
in New York Yankees Analysis
Email
PrintSean Forman takes a look a WAR and the Hall of Fame, and given recent discussion around the forum, I thought it was worth a link.
The quick hits:
- The top five career leaders in WAR are Babe Ruth, Barry Bonds, Ty Cobb, Willie Mays and Cy Young, with Hank Aaron, Walter Johnson, Honus Wagner, Tris Speaker and Roger Clemens completing the top 10.
- In general, 55 WAR has been the midpoint level for all Hall of Famers as three-fourths of the eligible players with 55 or more WAR are in the Hall of Fame.
- 84 percent of eligible players with 63 or more WAR are in the Hall of Fame
What does that mean for the current ballot?
Bert Blyleven (88 WAR) and Jeff Bagwell (80 WAR) look like they should be the locks.
Barry Larkin (68.9 WAR), a 12 time All Star, 3 Gold Gloves, 9 Silver Sluggers and 1995 MVP, won't get the respect he deserves because he was overshadowed throughout the second half of his career by the slugging shortstops Arod, Jeter, Garciaparra and Tejada. I'd vote for him.
Larry Walker (67.3 WAR), Gold Gloves and Silver Sluggers and the 1997 MVP award will all be overshadowed by "it's so easy to hit in Coor's Field" and "he only hit .230 in the postseason" (100 ABs). I'd vote for him.
Edgar Martinez (67.2 WAR), the great tragedy of his career was that his managers weren't willing to let him be a butcher at first base a la Jason Giambi. One of the best hitters of the generation won't make the Hall because of it. I'd vote for him.
Alan Trammell (66.9 WAR), he played his entire career for the Tigers, was clutch in the postseason, and he won Gold Gloves. I'm surprised he's not in yet, and I think that like Larkin, he suffers from overshadowing by the offensive shortstops of the next generation. Another yes for me.
Rafael Palmeiro (66.0 WAR), 3000 hits and 500 homers but a positive drug test. He denies he juiced, and I think that he must have gotten a few of those hits off 'roided up pitchers. I'd vote for him grudgingly.
Kevin Brown (64.8 WAR),Yankee fans only remember him when he was 40 years old and battling a balky back. But there was a stretch from '96-'00 when Brown racked up 1200 IP and 34.6 WAR. (For comparison: Maddux's 5 year best was 1191IP and 37.5 WAR). And while Brown had a reputation for being fragile among Yankee fans, the truth is he pitched more innings (and better) than a workhorse like Andy Pettitte, and only a few hundred fewer innings than Mike Mussina. Brown would get my vote, though I suspect the writers will overlook him as they await Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine and Pedro.
Tim Raines (64.6 WAR), he was so good before age 28 while no one was paying close enough attention that no one appreciated when he was a solid player from 28-38. 800 SB, 2600 H, .385 OBP, a ring with the '98 Yankees. He gets my vote.
Roberto Alomar (63.5 WAR), he came up in a recent discussion as a comparison to Willie Randolph. Alomar was the premier 2B in the game until his career fell apart with the Mets. He went from 7.8 WAR with the Indians in 2000 to 0.4 in New York. 10 Gold Gloves with 2700 career hits, and he should be a shoe in. This one is an easy yes.
Mark McGwire (63.1 WAR), he doesn't look likely to make the Hall thanks to the sanctimoniousness of the voters. My solution is to vote for him, and to put the steroid allegations right on the plaque. Of course, since I've already selected 10 Hall of Famers on my imaginary ballot, I can't vote for him this year- he simply wasn't good enough to deserve it.
160 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I will not condone a course of action that will lead us to WAR
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 3:34 PM EST reply actions
+1 for a reference to Star Wars.
-1 for a reference to the bad Star Wars.
"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."
The Phantom Menace? I think that's quite a bit below zero.
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
He’s still not better than Griffey.
"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."
what Griffey did in CF>what Bagwell did at first base
although Bagwell is a HOF for sure
So I was sitting on the couch, watching Brief Encounter...
by Brian5517209 on Dec 31, 2010 8:13 PM EST up reply actions
Jeff Bagwell isn't going to make it this year
That makes me sad. I sort of wish someone would Wikileaks some of these writers. They’re acting sanctimonious, but you’re telling me one of those guys never cheated on his wife? Or their taxes? Or plagiarized? Or went easy on a team/player/manager/GM in order to ensure continued access? Maybe if some of these guys are humiliated and outed as hypocrites, there will be less sancitmony.
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 3:42 PM EST reply actions
i really liked
the big league stew article about hall of fame voting.
I feel like we’re gonna see hall voting get really tough, and I have no idea what writers are gonna do when it comes guys who juiced like A-Rod and Bonds.
Hopefully they’ll realize they would have been hall of famers without the juice anyway, but thats a different argument and story entirely
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 4:14 PM EST reply actions
I'm not optimistic
If they’re punishing Bagwell – who never tested positive, didn’t appear in the Mitchell Report, and never admitted to anything – Bonds and A-Rod will probably be punished, too. It may be that enough voters think they’re too good and that overcomes any of the steroid jihadists. I predict that Bonds doesn’t make it on the first ballot, but does after a couple of years. And that will set a precedent for what happens to A-Rod.
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 4:19 PM EST up reply actions
i feel like voters just wanna be cautious
anyone they’re suspicious of isn’t going to get voted in right away. and if bagwell is clean, that sucks for him, because its not his fault he was born when he was and would play in the steroid era.
they dude raked and deserves to be in the hall. hopefully voters will see that
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 4:24 PM EST up reply actions
i never said he wasn't clean
voters will be cautious though
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 4:35 PM EST up reply actions
Are you saying “No way, Bagwell was clean” or “There is no way Bagwell was clean”? Because I can’t see how you have evidence in support of either conclusion.
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 4:36 PM EST up reply actions
I did 'em
and there is no doubt in my mind he did them too. His body broke down when he stopped doing them and his body shrunk…He did ’em.
There's always next year
I'm sorry, but that's pure speculation
A man’s reputation shouldn’t be impugned like that. Especially when he’s being considered for his profession’s highest honor.
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 4:44 PM EST up reply actions
Post proof or retract. Completely unsupported steroid allegations are very lame. You need to do a lot better than “his body shrunk” to claim with certainty that anyone did anything.
are you saying that all big people do not use steroids?
So I was sitting on the couch, watching Brief Encounter...
by Brian5517209 on Dec 31, 2010 8:14 PM EST up reply actions
When you said “I did ’em,” I thought you meant Bagwell. I was like, wow, dunno if I would admit to that on PSA.
Russell Martin is just like the Jewish Pharisees, trying to keep Jesus down.
No, I at first thought you were saying you had sex with Jeff Bagwell, I had to read it a couple times before I realized you meant you did steroids, lol
Russell Martin is just like the Jewish Pharisees, trying to keep Jesus down.
You make a valid point. I think that the steroid issue needs to be viewed as “would they likely have been a HOFer without the steroids?” A guy like McGuire, who was known to have been on them for years, is barely a HOFer even with his inflated numbers. Without steroids, he probably isn’t. Barry Bonds, on the other hand, was already a HOFer before he touched steroids. Likewise, Arod’s career is clearly enough to put him in. These guys would have been in the Hall with or without steroids.
Russell Martin is just like the Jewish Pharisees, trying to keep Jesus down.
completely agree
about how the issue needs to be viewed. it just sucks that there’s this whole controversy about who was or who wasn’t clean, and guys who have never tested positive or came out and said they did roids are going to be left out for a few years because voters don’t wanna be on record of voting for users
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 4:36 PM EST up reply actions
To me it doesn't matter
if Bonds “was already a HOF’er without the steroids”. That’s like saying Rose should be in because he was already Hall worthy before he bet on the games. Bonds should never get in. Nor should anybody else associated with roids.
There's always next year
Who knows what they would or would not have been without steroids? Who knows to what degree the numbers were inflated? There’s no way that you can know, or even make an “educated” guess, especially because you’re never going to have anything close to all the facts.
The Hall of Fame is about recognizing the best players of the generation for their achievements and contributions to the game. The question remains: Did (Player X) affect the game and do enough in his career that is worthy of recognition? It’s not The Hall of Nice People Who Followed Every Rule Perfectly. So simply saying “no users can get in” when the Hall is full of guys that used coke and greenies, total jerks like Ty Cobb, etc. is a ridiculous position.
A-Rod and Bonds changed the game and were incredibly talented. If you want to throw stones to make yourself feel better, you can put a sentence about their admitted use on their plaques, but there’s absolutely no way those guys aren’t Hall of Famers.
by Lord Duggan on Dec 31, 2010 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Seconded.
The HOF is a freaking museum.
Yes, well when I see five weirdo's dressed in togas stabbing a guy in the middle of the park in full view of a hundred people, I shoot the bastards, that's my policy.
thirded
I’ve always been against Rose getting in to the Hall. But the steroid debate is making me re-think that. I still think that betting on baseball is worse than any of those other crimes (strictly from the standpoint of a baseball fan), but I’m having a harder time saying that Rose’s crimes shouldn’t be separated from his playing career, which was clearly HOF-worthy.
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 4:54 PM EST up reply actions
I agree
about Rose. He should be in the Hall. He should just be kept away from the game. But you really think betting on games is worse than cheating on the field by using a drug to give yourself an advantage over your opponent? There I disagree.
There's always next year
yes
The guy who’s cheating is trying to win. The guy who’s betting on the games may have an incentive to throw the game.
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 5:03 PM EST up reply actions
Disagree
Baseball has never had a lot of rules about personal conduct, but since 1918 there has been one iron-clad rule – no betting on games. It’s a rule that (I’m told) all of the players know about. Rose, for whatever reason, thought that he should be exempt.
If there is a case to be made for the steroid people, it is that, strictly speaking, nothing they did violated the formal rules of baseball at the time. Rose can’t say that.
Compare Rose to Paul Hornung. In 1963, Hornung was suspended by the NFL for betting on games and associating with known gamblers. He immediately apologized and after one year was allowed to resume his NFL career.
Rose, on the other hand, denied the charges for 15 years, finally admitting them in 2004 in an attempt to gain reinstatement to baseball. I saw a subsequent interview with him; deep down, he still doesn’t think he did anything wrong, or, if he did, it wasn’t anything serious. He just doesn’t get it, and as long as he doesn’t get it, no HOF. He had an HOF career but forfeited the HOF.
Mickey C
i agree with this
+1
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 4:51 PM EST up reply actions
Yup.
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 4:51 PM EST up reply actions
You're right, david.
It’s completely insane that we’d just agree. That simply never happens. It’s a conspiracy!
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 4:53 PM EST up reply actions
what does that say, exactly?
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 4:53 PM EST up reply actions
you're the one saying it says a lot about something.
i want to know what you think it says.
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 4:56 PM EST up reply actions
never said that.
i just dont want to deny someone’s ability to play baseball.
just because they cheated doesn’t mean they weren’t really good as it was.
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 5:00 PM EST up reply actions
If it was the Hall of People Who Only Did Good Things, I'd feel differently.
Until it is, I will support them getting in.
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 5:01 PM EST up reply actions
pretty much what i just said
i dont think its right that they had an advantage over non users.
however, like wraithpk and i were discussing before, i think the hall needs to look at it as
would they likely have been a HOFer without the steroids?
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 5:03 PM EST up reply actions
I was agreeing.
And there is no way will ever know who did them 1 time, 5 times, did them for years and never got caught. We will never know the full scope of the steroid era, so I don’t think it’s right to judge based on that alone.
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 5:05 PM EST up reply actions
yup, we're definitely on the same page
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 5:06 PM EST up reply actions
thats not important
We’ll never know for sure what anybody would have been with or without steroids. The numbers tell a little, but never the whole thing. We also don’t know how many people used steroids, or who did and didn’t. Canceco says there’s already some steroid users in the HOF that nobody has caught.
We don’t have answers. Thats the biggest problem with the whole era. The thing that makes the most sense is to accept the steroid era, let the best players of the generation into the Hall, and to move on.
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
I agree when it comes to off the field issues. But when a substance is used that distinctly gives a player an advantage over his opponent, I have to disagree. That’s cheating to me. Pure and simple.
There's always next year
what about guys who cork their bats?
Or guys who scuff the ball? Or guys who used greenies?
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 5:07 PM EST up reply actions
Who has corked and was caught other than Sosa? He has other issues. I don’t see how greenies are a performance enhancer. Scuffing? Hmm. Not sure how to classify that.
There's always next year
re: greenies
Instead of being exhausted when you take the field, you have more energy. And if you’re only keeping out guys who have been “caught” cheating, then doesn’t Bagwell have to make it in?
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 5:14 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, but an Amp can give you more energy. As things stand, yes, Bagwell should probably get in, his numbers are HOF worthy. I didn’t say he was caught, I just stated, my opinion, I have no doubt he used judging by my own experiences and observations.
There's always next year
what about spitballs?
there’s been all kinds of cheating over the game thats been done by players already in the HOF. The Hall isn’t there for people who only did good things. Like Duggan said, the Hall is for the best players of each generation. And guys like Bonds and A-Rod fit that category. And thats all there is to it.
If you want to think they aren’t Hall of Famers in your mind, more power to you. But the Hall of Fame is a place for the best talents of each generation, and A-Rod and Bonds are two of the best talents of this generation. Seems like a match to me.
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
yes we'll see
Hopefully Bonds and A-Rod and Clemens won’t receive the same treatment McGwire is getting.
Clemens and Bonds will be the first test. Two of the best players of all time who have been accused of steroid use on the ballot. And they’d better get in too.
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
The people they were competing against were also cheating.
I just don’t think it’s so cut and dry to say “This guy did them, so he can’t get in”. I think there is a lot more to it than that alone. Plenty of people cheated without ever using a steroid, I’m sure. They might get in, depending on if anyone even knew what they were doing. That’s why I don’t think saying steroids = no hall is the correct position to take.
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 5:08 PM EST up reply actions
This deserves a Rec
There’s no way A-Rod and Bonds aren’t Hall of Famers. They changed the game of baseball and rewrote the record books. And you’re going to put people like Jim Rice into the Hall but not them? Come on now.
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
I mostly agree. I believe Arod that he just did steroids in his Texas years, and we saw what he could do without them in 2007. It is widely accepted that Bonds didn’t start using until 2000 or 2001, so he played most of his career without them, and as I said earlier, he was already a hall of famer at that point.
A guy like McGuire is different, in my eyes. Canseco pretty much said that McGuire was using them his whole career, and everything Canseco has said about steroids has been true. It’s true that steroids aren’t going to magically make a 10 HR guy hit 70, but years of steroid use can make a huge difference in someone’s body.
Russell Martin is just like the Jewish Pharisees, trying to keep Jesus down.
This doesn’t have to do with WAR, but speaking of the Hall of Fame: This question is up for anyone: Out of these, which of these deserve to make the Hall of Fame? Derek Jeter, Alex Rodriguez, Andy Pettitte, Barry Bonds, Ken Griffey Jr., Gary Sheffield.
Writer for Pinstripe Alley, MLB Daily Dish
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
if I can only pick one out of all of those, it's Bonds
I think he’s a Top 5 player, and that only Babe Ruth is clearly better than him. Jeter, Rodriguez and Griffey are all certain Hall of Famers, too, but I don’t think they’re quite in Bonds’s class, though A-Rod could get there with two more great seasons and a few good ones.
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
I may have misunderstood the question
If it’s one guy, it’s Bonds. As I said, Jeter, A-Rod and Griffey are all certain HOFers. I’d say yes to Pettitte, partially because of what he did over the course of his career and partially because I’m biased. And I could be talked into Sheffield, too. His career WAR of 63.3 (B-Ref), 509 HRs and .393 OBP are pretty convincing.
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 4:29 PM EST up reply actions
I'd say Jeter, A-Rod, Bonds, and Griffey.
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
Well, you are entitled to that, but I hope differently.
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 4:44 PM EST up reply actions
You're entitled to your opinion
But in my mind, Bonds and Alex are two of the best ever. It’s a crime not to put them into the HOF.
And I hate Barry Bonds- but he was an incredible ballplayer before PEDs. He’s a million times better guys like Jim Rice. If you think Jim Rice is a hall of famer and that Bonds is not, it’s absolutely ridiculous.
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
I love Andy, but I can't help but believe his only chance is The Hall of Very Good.
I hope I’m wrong.
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 4:58 PM EST up reply actions
Sheffield got to 500 HR
that’ll be a big plus to him. He has a shot.
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
Do you think 500 means the same to voters nowadays?
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
Probably not the same as it used to be
But it still means something. Sheffield was a dominant offensive threat for a long time. I’m not saying he will get in, but he has a shot.
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
Media relations are also a huge factor, and one that will diminish Sheffield’s chances.
Writer for Pinstripe Alley, MLB Daily Dish
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
they shouldn't be that big a factor
The factor for a baseball player getting into the Hall should be their performance on the baseball field.
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
Off topic, you want the Yankees to sign Soriano, correct?
Writer for Pinstripe Alley, MLB Daily Dish
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
yes sir you bet I do
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
I don't think so either.
Highly considered, maybe. But I don’t think he’ll make it. I wouldn’t vote for him, personally.
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 5:47 PM EST up reply actions
Jeter, A-Rod, Bonds, Griffey
A-Rod, Bonds and Griffey are three of the greatest players of all time and some of the best HR hitters of all time. Jeter is one of the best singles hitters of all time. They all deserve it.
Sheffield I’d say should get in as well, but he doesn’t deserve it as much as those four.
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
question for everyone
on a scale of 1-10, how upset/angry would you be if you found out Derek Jeter took a performance enhancing drug that was banned by baseball during the time he used it?
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 5:07 PM EST reply actions
I can't put a number on it
But I guess I’d be somewhat disappointed. I’ve got a major case of SOF, but I’d like to think Jeter and Rivera were clean. At this point, those are are the only guys I would care about. And it would give Yankee haters so much joy, which would suck.
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 5:12 PM EST up reply actions
I would be much more upset if Rivera used than Jeter, personally.
Writer for Pinstripe Alley, MLB Daily Dish
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
jeter has been my idol since i was 5
so Jeter for me
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 5:23 PM EST up reply actions
Same here regarding Rivera
I’d be pretty unhappy if I found out that Jeter did as well. At the very least he could’ve put up better power numbers.
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
not so much angry as I would be stunned
just because of the type of guy he is.
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
I figure they all do, so whatever.
by Marisa Ingemi on Dec 31, 2010 6:30 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I’ve been asked that question before. My answer keeps changing.
On the one hand, I wouldn’t care, because it would simply confirm my Hobbsian belief that with fortune and glory on the line, there is no reason to expect sportsmanship or fair play in a sport.
On the other hand, it would be disappointing, because it means I am right.
"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."
when did steroids officially become banned?
HGH as well?
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 5:26 PM EST reply actions
Wasn't till
after the scandal without McGwire started I think, officially. But according to baseball rules all illegal substances are considered taboo anyway, and roids are illegal.
There's always next year
yup i know
baseball bans everything that is illegal, and since steroids are illegal without a subscription, thats banned.
just wasn’t sure if/when the specific rule came about
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 5:30 PM EST up reply actions
There was no testing or punishment policy until after the “survey” where the famed 103 names came from. I believe this was in 2003 and then the official policy was implemented in 2004 (I may be off by a year).
It has always been against MLB rules to break the law in any way, but there was no punishment or policy specifically regarding steroids until much later. And by that, what I mean is, until the outcry over steroids exceeded the increased revenue they generated, and any more blatant indifference to drug use would prevent the league from keeping their moral high ground.
pretty much what i was looking for here
thanks dude
I believe in the Church of Baseball
Free FreeBradshaw!
by Frank Campagnola on Dec 31, 2010 5:43 PM EST up reply actions
It’s not as cut and dry as saying “roids are illegal.” Pharmaceutical companies are constantly developing new steroids. When they are first released to the public, they are perfectly legal. They don’t become illegal until the FDA catches on and bans them. This can take a while, though, sometimes years. What McGuire was using was perfectly legal at the time, and was even sold at your local GNC. It has since been labeled as an Androgenic Anabolic Steroid and banned by the FDA in 2005.
Russell Martin is just like the Jewish Pharisees, trying to keep Jesus down.
Back to the Post
Who, of the retired players, has the highest WAR and is not in the Hall?
There's always next year
right now, it's Bagwell
Though this is his first year of eligibility. Lou Whitaker has the highest WAR of guys who are eligible and not in the Hall. And there are a handful of guys behind him on the list with fewer WAR (most notably – to me, at least, is Ernie Banks).
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 5:33 PM EST up reply actions
So....
According to WAR, Lou Whitaker was a more valuable player than Ernie Banks?
There's always next year
in short, yes
I think a better way to phrase it is that Whitaker contributed more over the course of their careers. You might look at their respective peak values before deciding which player you’d rather have, but Whitaker was about 5 wins better than Banks over their careers.
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 5:42 PM EST up reply actions
There ya go…That’s all I need to know to think WAR is highly flawed. Whitaker was a great 2nd baseman and I think he should be in the Hall. But he was no Ernie Banks.
There's always next year
I believe we had this discussion yesterday
Or at least, I made this point with someone in a thread yesterday. Why do you assume WAR is flawed just because you don’t agree with the numbers? Isn’t it possible – POSSIBLE – that you’re underestimating Whitaker, or overestimating Banks? Are you 100% certain that you’re right – no room for debate?
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 5:47 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, I was in on some of that with kuri, not you…I don’t think. But no, I don’t really want to get into it again. I agree that some of the metrics are valuable stats to evaluate a players’ worth, just not WAR. I also think they, the metrics, should be used in conjunction with stats like BA, OBP, OPS, RBI, etc to analyze a players value and not a substitute. I guess that’s my biggest issue with the metrics guys; They have disregarded the use of traditional stats all together as if their way is now “God’s Rule”….It’s ridiculous.
There's always next year
well, I don't want to have the debate with someone who doesn't want to have the debate
by long time listener on Dec 31, 2010 5:55 PM EST up reply actions
I have honestly never seen someone not use them in conjunction with those stats.
But saying someone is good because of batting average isn’t any more accurate than saying someone is bad because of WAR.
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 5:56 PM EST up reply actions
Really?
You KNOW there are those here who REFUSE to even mention a traditional stat any more. I think it actually makes them physically ill to even mention them.
There's always next year
Well, I don't recall someone completely ignoring anything "traditional".
I think the general consensus is that the best way to do it is to use both. There might be people who will only use saber stuff, but they’d be just as incorrect to do so as I think people who use nothing but “traditional stats” are.
Saying someone who has a high batting average is good with no other support is equally insignificant to me as saying someone who has a low UZR is bad. Needs more.
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 6:03 PM EST up reply actions
I agree
I probably wouldn’t discount the pro metrics guys views as easily if they would admit the usefullness, or at least infuse their views with some, of the traditional stats
There's always next year
I think most of that happens when someone attempts to base an argument on one stat.
Again, maybe I’ve missed it, but when someone says “batting average is irrelevant” or “wins don’t matter” it’s because someone tried to say “player x sucks cause he only got 16 wins!” or “player y is better than player z because player y had a higher batting average”. Neither of those statements are necessarily true, but could be if more evidence was given that supported the theory. Just my opinion. I think a mix of both are ideal in analyzing parts of the game and it’s players.
People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.
by WhatwouldJeterdo on Dec 31, 2010 6:17 PM EST up reply actions
Actually, some of the traditional stats favor Whitaker, too
Career Triple Slashes:
Banks: .274/.330/.500
Whitaker: .276/.363/.426
I bet that .033 difference in OBP contributed a lot to the 5 game difference.
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
WAR is flawed because every numerical representation of complicated events is going to have a degree of inaccuracy. It’s not flawed because it doesn’t agree with your subjective recollection.
For reference, Whitaker compiled a career 74.3 WAR and Banks compiled a career 74.1 WAR. No one with an understanding of how that metric is meant to be applied would tell you that that means that one is considerably better than the other.
Banks is given great praise for his 512 home runs, but a .330 career OBP is a serious drawback to his value. He was never much beyond a power hitter, and it’s hard to justify giving elite status to someone who makes an out in over two-thirds of their plate appearances.
But that's why
there’s nine places in a batting order. Banks wasn’t a one or two hitter. He was a clean up guy and his job wasn’t to get on base but to drive the OBP guys in, which he did pretty well.
There's always next year
Batting order does very little to change the goal of each at bat. Banks didn’t come up with a runner on 2nd and 2 outs every time up to the plate. The goal is always to score runs and give the guy behind you a chance to come to the plate. You don’t extend rallies or give the #5 guy a chance to come to the plate if you’re making so many outs as the #4 guy.
This is not to say that Banks wasn’t a great player, he certainly was. But the idea that the only way he could ever be compared to Lou Whitaker is through some creation of fancy numbers is silly. His only real advantage was in hitting for power.
Fair enough. I’ve always thought highly of Whitaker and Trammell. I think both of them should be in the Hall.
There's always next year
There's another way to reconcile WAR with your recollection
Banks posted four seasons with a WAR above 8.0 (according to Baseball Reference.) Whitaker’s best season was 6.9, and he only had two seasons above 6.0.
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
Incidentally, where did you get those WARs?
Baseball Reference has 64.4 for Banks and 69.7 for Whitaker.
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
Thanks
Actually, I think this highlights one element of the resistance to a lot of SABRmetrics. They haven’t become quite as standardized as the traditional stats.
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
Fangraphs has their career WAR about the same. Banks played 17 full seasons, and Whitaker 18. So, Banks was worth .2 wins per year more over his career. Where perception bucks reality is that Banks was far better in his prime than Whitaker was. Whitaker’s best season was 6.5 wins, but Banks had 5 seasons that were better than that, including a 10.4 win season. On the other hand, Whitaker only had three seasons under 3.4 wins, and two of those were his last two years in the league, while Banks had 8. To give further evidence, the standard deviation for wins per year for Whitaker was 1.4, and for Banks it was 3.3.
So basically, you think Banks was better because you are thinking about the six year span where he was a beast, but you forget the 11 years where he was below average to slightly above average. Whitaker was far more consistent: he was never a beast, but he was solidly above average for 15 years. In the end, their careers are very close.
Russell Martin is just like the Jewish Pharisees, trying to keep Jesus down.
This does return to the question of how to relate career WAR to the HoF. Take the WAR of 55 mentioned by jscape as a midpoint, and consider two players. One player amasses that over 20 years, averaging 2.75 wins per season. The other amasses the same total in 6 monster seasons (just above 9 wins per season) then retires. Does either player get in?
(Also, your explanation is what I was trying to say in a reply to david d above, but you explained it better.)
Usqueadbaugham! Anam muck an dhoul ! Did ye drink me doornail?
is anyone willing to deny what the 98 home run race did for baseball?
its what got me to start following the sport. the fact that they were juicing doenst take away what they did to save baseball.
עם ישראל חי
You are definitely right, that year did revitalize baseball, but at what cost? The integrity of our record books is forever broken. Personally, I still view 61 as the real record until a player breaks it who isn’t on steroids. And I don’t give Bonds the HR record, either. I can’t tell you how many extra he hit because of steroids, but I think everyone will agree it is more than 7. If Arod beats Aaron by 31, I give it to him because I think anyone would be hard pressed to prove that he hit more than 10 extra in each of his three years in Texas.
Russell Martin is just like the Jewish Pharisees, trying to keep Jesus down.
who has the 61 record?
because when maris hit it there was a lot of argument over whether it counts because he had more games to hit in. both records were kept separately for a long time because of that. i understand that steroids is cheating, but i would rather declare the 90s and early 2000s the steroid era and move on. how many turn of the century ERAs are impossibly low because of the spitball, which is illegal now. there was the deadball era, now we just finished the steroid era and move on. thats if you ask me.
עם ישראל חי
Correct me if I'm wrong
but isn’t WAR and the like supposed to measure players relative to others in their own era, and for that reason, the steroid era players would still be assessed in a manner where one could compare their performance to players from other eras… the dead ball era perhaps?
I can’t believe the people who say Bagwell should not be in.
by Marisa Ingemi on Dec 31, 2010 6:28 PM EST via mobile reply actions
oh hell yeah dude
if Bleyleven or Morris get in, how does Mussina not?
So I was sitting on the couch, watching Brief Encounter...
by Brian5517209 on Dec 31, 2010 8:17 PM EST up reply actions
Mike Mussina is a first ballot Hall of Famer.
I hope he makes it.
"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."
the Larry Walker(he hit in Coors thing so no HOF) is stupid
I guess no players from Colorado will ever make the HOF? thats BS
I was too young too remmeber the mid 90’s but a quick look at his fangraphs page will show that Walker was a baseball diety
So I was sitting on the couch, watching Brief Encounter...
HOF
Mussina had a 74.6 WAR (24th best all time amongst pitchers) which should definitely get him in the Hall. His WAR ranks him higher than Don Sutton, Bob Feller, Don Drysdale, Juan Marichal, Jim Bunning, Jim Palmer, Dennis Eckersley, Whitey Ford, Sandy Koufax, Red Ruffing, and many, many other Hall of Fame pitchers.
In fairness, a bunch of those guys missed time for WW2 and Korea. And Eck was a reliever for half his career.
"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."
Mussina
And of course 270 W, 3.68 ERA (in Al East during Steroid Era), 5 All Star games, 7 Gold Gloves, and 2,813 strikeouts (19th all time). He finished in the top 25 in MVP voting three times, and the top 6 in Cy Young 9 times.
Whenever Mussina is mentioned,
it makes me sad. I wish he was still pitching.
I am a leaf in the wind. Watch me soar.
agreed
I loved the guy. My favorite starter of all time and second favorite pitcher of all time (only to Mo).
"I'll do whatever it takes to win games, whether it's sitting on a bench waving a towel, handing a cup of water to a teammate, or hitting the game-winning shot."- Kobe Bryant
Factoring Mussina’s competition is hugely important- the difference between AL and NL might not have been as noticeable in 1990 or it might not have been as well documented, but there was a real difference.
"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Pinstripe Alley
Related FanShots on Pinstripe Alley
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
