 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » No more Nomar.
shep1582
Curses, foiled again.
If Texas seceded, the USA would implode.
March 12, 2010 at 03:37AM View BBCode
I thought we already seceded.Curses, foiled again.
If Texas seceded, the USA would implode.
dirtdevil
1) the country would become immediately smarter
2) the country would become immediately more dependent on foreign oil.
3) george w bush would immediately order an invasion to create 'regime change'.
March 12, 2010 at 03:41AM View BBCode
if texas seceeded (successfully this time), three things would happen:1) the country would become immediately smarter
2) the country would become immediately more dependent on foreign oil.
3) george w bush would immediately order an invasion to create 'regime change'.
Jughead
March 12, 2010 at 03:50AM View BBCode
One of the agreements Texas made in 1845 to be accepted into the union was that they reserved the right to split into up to five states if it so desired and at any time. I predict that after the November elections that they will consider it. Considering the Dems should lose 4-6 seats this fall (as is typical in a new president's first midterm election), and considering that such a move would result in a +6 shift for Republican senators (the state with Austin would have two Democrats), I can see it happening.
shep1582
except that canada should secede from the world before they kill more athletes because of their careless and cavalier attitudes like pwndiodium.
March 12, 2010 at 04:10AM View BBCode
we're not supposed to discuss politics here, so, no comment.except that canada should secede from the world before they kill more athletes because of their careless and cavalier attitudes like pwndiodium.
Jon
March 12, 2010 at 04:40AM View BBCode
Well this thread got stupid in a hurry. Shall I, once again, drag out the advanced defensive stats that are like 9,000 times better than FP and RF, or is not worth the effort?
Jon
(This stat is on B-R too, for those who aren't too lazy to just look at FP and RF)
Ryne Sandberg: [url=http://www.baseballprojection.com/war/s/sandr001.htm]+74 TZ career.[/url] 61.8 WAR ranks 95th of all time, in the company of Jackie Robinson, Joe Jackson, Scott Rolen (!) and Dwight Evans
Joe Morgan: [url=http://www.baseballprojection.com/war/m/morgj001.htm]-43 TZ[/url]. Ouch. Thought he was better than that. Still, his bat was among the best ever at his position, and was good enough for a [url=http://www.baseballprojection.com/war/top500.htm]103.5 WAR[/url], 19th overall, in the company of Nap Lajoie, Cap Anson and Frank Robinson.
Jackie Robinson: [url=http://www.baseballprojection.com/war/r/robij103.htm]+51 TZ[/url]. 63 WAR is 90th overall, in the company of Robbie Alomar, Reggie Smith, Joe Jackson, and...Ryne Sandberg.
Those are just examples off the top of my head (because I want to get back to playing MLB The Show and got impatient). I'm not drawing any conclusions, just throwing out data that's out there, and is far better than crude metrics like FP and RF.
March 12, 2010 at 05:28AM View BBCode
Sigh.(This stat is on B-R too, for those who aren't too lazy to just look at FP and RF)
Ryne Sandberg: [url=http://www.baseballprojection.com/war/s/sandr001.htm]+74 TZ career.[/url] 61.8 WAR ranks 95th of all time, in the company of Jackie Robinson, Joe Jackson, Scott Rolen (!) and Dwight Evans
Joe Morgan: [url=http://www.baseballprojection.com/war/m/morgj001.htm]-43 TZ[/url]. Ouch. Thought he was better than that. Still, his bat was among the best ever at his position, and was good enough for a [url=http://www.baseballprojection.com/war/top500.htm]103.5 WAR[/url], 19th overall, in the company of Nap Lajoie, Cap Anson and Frank Robinson.
Jackie Robinson: [url=http://www.baseballprojection.com/war/r/robij103.htm]+51 TZ[/url]. 63 WAR is 90th overall, in the company of Robbie Alomar, Reggie Smith, Joe Jackson, and...Ryne Sandberg.
Those are just examples off the top of my head (because I want to get back to playing MLB The Show and got impatient). I'm not drawing any conclusions, just throwing out data that's out there, and is far better than crude metrics like FP and RF.
cowboymatt43
This is fun:
Morgan: -43 TZ; 103.5 WAR (Great offensively, not so great defensively)
Collins: -2 TZ; 126.7 WAR
Hornsby: 51 TZ; 127.7 WAR
Lajoie: 62 TZ; 104.2
Gehringer: 30 TZ; 80.9
Carew: 17 TZ; 79.3 WAR
Whitaker: 70 TZ; 69.5
Grich: 59 TZ; 67.6 WAR
Mazeroski: 110 TZ (holy crap!); 27.0 WAR
[Edited on 3-12-2010 by cowboymatt43]
March 12, 2010 at 07:16AM View BBCode
Why don't we add [url=http://www.baseballprojection.com/war/b/biggc001.htm]Biggio[/url] too: TZ -19; WAR 65.9. Just like I said, he and Sandberg are close offensively, but Sandberg is miles ahead defensively.This is fun:
Morgan: -43 TZ; 103.5 WAR (Great offensively, not so great defensively)
Collins: -2 TZ; 126.7 WAR
Hornsby: 51 TZ; 127.7 WAR
Lajoie: 62 TZ; 104.2
Gehringer: 30 TZ; 80.9
Carew: 17 TZ; 79.3 WAR
Whitaker: 70 TZ; 69.5
Grich: 59 TZ; 67.6 WAR
Mazeroski: 110 TZ (holy crap!); 27.0 WAR
[Edited on 3-12-2010 by cowboymatt43]
cowboymatt43
Polanco: TZ 95 (I don't seem so crazy now!); 31.7 WAR
Kent: -13 TZ; 59.4 WAR
Alomar: -24 TZ; 63.6
Scott: -18 TZ; 2.7 WAR
Randolph: 74 TZ; 60.4 WAR
Lind: 47 TZ; 1.8 WAR
Andrews: -43 TZ; 10 WAR
Hudson: 18 TZ; 18.7 WAR
[Edited on 3-12-2010 by cowboymatt43]
March 12, 2010 at 07:32AM View BBCode
Here's some more:Polanco: TZ 95 (I don't seem so crazy now!); 31.7 WAR
Kent: -13 TZ; 59.4 WAR
Alomar: -24 TZ; 63.6
Scott: -18 TZ; 2.7 WAR
Randolph: 74 TZ; 60.4 WAR
Lind: 47 TZ; 1.8 WAR
Andrews: -43 TZ; 10 WAR
Hudson: 18 TZ; 18.7 WAR
[Edited on 3-12-2010 by cowboymatt43]
cowboymatt43
The big surprises were that maybe I'm not so crazy for talking about Ryno being one of the best defensive second basemen ever, maybe I'm not so crazy for bringing Polanco into the equation, and maybe I'm not so crazy for doubting the defensive prowess of Biggio, Alomar, Morgan, and others.
I feel rather justified by this. Thanks Jon and thanks shep for encouraging him.
Oh, and shep, you were right about Biggio being a better than Ryno offensively, well, at least according to WAR. He's certainly not miles better like you claimed, but he does have a higher WAR. However, you were way off base regarding Biggio's fielding, at least if we use TZ as the measuring stick. So I'll take Ryno instead of Biggs due to his more consistent fielding and his more consistent power.
[Edited on 3-12-2010 by cowboymatt43]
March 12, 2010 at 07:43AM View BBCode
Welp, Ryno ranks third in the list of second basemen that we have talked about in this thread behind Maz (110) and Polanco (95) with a TZ of 74. He's tied with Willie Randolph, which wasn't surprising considering how close their FPs and RFs were.The big surprises were that maybe I'm not so crazy for talking about Ryno being one of the best defensive second basemen ever, maybe I'm not so crazy for bringing Polanco into the equation, and maybe I'm not so crazy for doubting the defensive prowess of Biggio, Alomar, Morgan, and others.
I feel rather justified by this. Thanks Jon and thanks shep for encouraging him.
Oh, and shep, you were right about Biggio being a better than Ryno offensively, well, at least according to WAR. He's certainly not miles better like you claimed, but he does have a higher WAR. However, you were way off base regarding Biggio's fielding, at least if we use TZ as the measuring stick. So I'll take Ryno instead of Biggs due to his more consistent fielding and his more consistent power.
[Edited on 3-12-2010 by cowboymatt43]
shep1582
sandberg for his career was +74, biggio -19, which is 93 plays, divided by 17 (biggio played 19 full seasons, Sandberg 15) seasons is about 5.5 plays per season. a small difference, but an edge to RS.
and the RAR (runs above average), RS was 546 through age 34. CB was 581 through age 34. Sanberg had 8088 PA, Biggio 7782. That's roughly an extra half season more for RS.
that's a total of offensive and defensive runs, or an accumulation of all the stats in this particular formula. so RS's edge in defense if more than made offensively by Biggio, by a tiny margin overall, 35. That's 3 runs per season that Biggio was better than Sandberg, with the extra AB's that's 44.7 for CB per season, and 40.4 per season for RS. Overall edge to Biggio by about 4 runs per season (off and def).
WAR (wins above average), through age 34, RS 57.3, CB 56.5. Per season, RS 4,24 wins, for CB 4.35. (I used 13.5 for Rhino, 13 for Bigg)
This formula doesn't SAY it includes park factors, but it does say it uses a different run indicator for low run environments. Biggio played about half his career in a low run environment.
Then there's this:
Bat runs - This is park adjusted linear weights batting runs, using customized weights at the team level to ensure that total runs credited to players will equal the actual runs scored for that team.
through age 34, CB 257, RS 162.
So, we have another barometer that Sandberg was a slightly better defensive player, but Biggio was a better offensive player, and contributed more runs leading to more wins for his team.
(I cut it off at 34 because we're not really interested in what a player does that pads his bulk stats, but what they did when they were in their prime. I eliminated the last 2 years of RS, and the last 7 for CB. I could have stopped at 33, because RS only had 247 PA, but I also included CB first season, when he had 130 PA. I think they balanced each other out.)
This is two different sources (this one and Bill James) that have no dog in the fight who both say, after objective analysis, that CB was a slightly better player than RS.
Sandberg was great, Biggio was greater.
March 12, 2010 at 08:04AM View BBCode
interesting. so, defensively...sandberg for his career was +74, biggio -19, which is 93 plays, divided by 17 (biggio played 19 full seasons, Sandberg 15) seasons is about 5.5 plays per season. a small difference, but an edge to RS.
and the RAR (runs above average), RS was 546 through age 34. CB was 581 through age 34. Sanberg had 8088 PA, Biggio 7782. That's roughly an extra half season more for RS.
that's a total of offensive and defensive runs, or an accumulation of all the stats in this particular formula. so RS's edge in defense if more than made offensively by Biggio, by a tiny margin overall, 35. That's 3 runs per season that Biggio was better than Sandberg, with the extra AB's that's 44.7 for CB per season, and 40.4 per season for RS. Overall edge to Biggio by about 4 runs per season (off and def).
WAR (wins above average), through age 34, RS 57.3, CB 56.5. Per season, RS 4,24 wins, for CB 4.35. (I used 13.5 for Rhino, 13 for Bigg)
This formula doesn't SAY it includes park factors, but it does say it uses a different run indicator for low run environments. Biggio played about half his career in a low run environment.
Then there's this:
Bat runs - This is park adjusted linear weights batting runs, using customized weights at the team level to ensure that total runs credited to players will equal the actual runs scored for that team.
through age 34, CB 257, RS 162.
So, we have another barometer that Sandberg was a slightly better defensive player, but Biggio was a better offensive player, and contributed more runs leading to more wins for his team.
(I cut it off at 34 because we're not really interested in what a player does that pads his bulk stats, but what they did when they were in their prime. I eliminated the last 2 years of RS, and the last 7 for CB. I could have stopped at 33, because RS only had 247 PA, but I also included CB first season, when he had 130 PA. I think they balanced each other out.)
This is two different sources (this one and Bill James) that have no dog in the fight who both say, after objective analysis, that CB was a slightly better player than RS.
Sandberg was great, Biggio was greater.
cowboymatt43
This is the ultimate downfall of stats, whether traditional or sabermetrics. In the end, they say whatever you want them to say.
March 12, 2010 at 08:10AM View BBCode
I can see what you are saying and your logic makes sense. But I am sure that I can find stats that will show that Sandberg was better too - for instance, Ryne's 114 OPS+ to Biggs 111 OPS+. Pair that with the various defensive stats around, all of which (that I've seen) say Ryno was better defensively and you get Ryno being a greater player than the great player Biggio.This is the ultimate downfall of stats, whether traditional or sabermetrics. In the end, they say whatever you want them to say.
shep1582
At age 34, Biggio was a +16 TZ, because -35 of that TZ was when he played the OF and at 2B in his decline years (about half and half)
Rhino is a +56 at the same age.
That's a +40 TZ difference for Rhino through 13 seasons, or 3 plays per season. That's a tiny advantage. but an advantage for RS.
So RS made approx 40 more plays, but Biggio produced 75 more runs at age 34. (at least, according to this formula). They are very close, but Bigg is a tic better all around.
I'll take Biggio all day and twice on Sunday, TYVM for playing.
March 12, 2010 at 08:21AM View BBCode
I disagree, from a purely offensive standpoint, Biggio's 257-182 edge in batting runs through age 34.At age 34, Biggio was a +16 TZ, because -35 of that TZ was when he played the OF and at 2B in his decline years (about half and half)
Rhino is a +56 at the same age.
That's a +40 TZ difference for Rhino through 13 seasons, or 3 plays per season. That's a tiny advantage. but an advantage for RS.
So RS made approx 40 more plays, but Biggio produced 75 more runs at age 34. (at least, according to this formula). They are very close, but Bigg is a tic better all around.
I'll take Biggio all day and twice on Sunday, TYVM for playing.
shep1582
That does not factor in Wrigley, it's a raw stat. This formula Jon posted factors in park effects in batting runs, showing that part of Rhino's hitting edge was due to the park he played in, and when you take that edge away, Biggio was better.
Biggio, lifetime, has a better OBP and OPS. He hit 148 of his 291 homers on the road, RS hit 118 of his 282 away from the ivy. Biggio had as much power as Ryne.
March 12, 2010 at 08:28AM View BBCode
Originally posted by cowboymatt43
I can see what you are saying and your logic makes sense. But I am sure that I can find stats that will show that Sandberg was better too - for instance, Ryne's 114 OPS+ to Biggs 111 OPS+. Pair that with the various defensive stats around, all of which (that I've seen) say Ryno was better defensively and you get Ryno being a greater player than the great player Biggio.
This is the ultimate downfall of stats, whether traditional or sabermetrics. In the end, they say whatever you want them to say.
That does not factor in Wrigley, it's a raw stat. This formula Jon posted factors in park effects in batting runs, showing that part of Rhino's hitting edge was due to the park he played in, and when you take that edge away, Biggio was better.
Biggio, lifetime, has a better OBP and OPS. He hit 148 of his 291 homers on the road, RS hit 118 of his 282 away from the ivy. Biggio had as much power as Ryne.
drew
March 12, 2010 at 08:34AM View BBCode
The best part of this thread is its title is a pun which I get.
shep1582
the 2nd worst was me jumping in and not letting go.
sorry drew.
(you can apply for readmission into Texas after one calendar year, matt.
March 12, 2010 at 08:49AM View BBCode
the worst part was matt taking the bait when tyles first insulted rhyno.the 2nd worst was me jumping in and not letting go.
sorry drew.
(you can apply for readmission into Texas after one calendar year, matt.
Lou.
March 12, 2010 at 10:07AM View BBCode
placido polanco is still accepted (somewhere) as a viable part of this discussion.
cowboymatt43
I tell you what, if I get a job at the end of this year or the beginning of next year (like I'm planning) and it happens to be in Texas, only an act of God could keep me out.
Or maybe pesky little Craig Biggio.
One or the other.
March 12, 2010 at 10:32AM View BBCode
Originally posted by shep1582
(you can apply for readmission into Texas after one calendar year, matt.
I tell you what, if I get a job at the end of this year or the beginning of next year (like I'm planning) and it happens to be in Texas, only an act of God could keep me out.
Or maybe pesky little Craig Biggio.
One or the other.
sycophantman
Do you want to change the subject? Then let's talk about Larry Walker. Does he deserve to be in the HOF more than Nomar? YES!
[/quote]
Oh, no. You misunderstand, I deeply do not care about stats in baseball. I'm just poking a little fun. Carry on.
March 12, 2010 at 01:10PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
[quote][i]Originally posted by cowboymatt43[/i]
Do you want to change the subject? Then let's talk about Larry Walker. Does he deserve to be in the HOF more than Nomar? YES!
[/quote]
Oh, no. You misunderstand, I deeply do not care about stats in baseball. I'm just poking a little fun. Carry on.
dirtdevil
you've tried that before you know. it didn't work out all that well for you.
March 12, 2010 at 02:29PM View BBCode
Originally posted by shep1582
just like if Canada were wiped off the map.
you've tried that before you know. it didn't work out all that well for you.
tworoosters
Is this possible ?
I was totally unaware the Figgins could be replaced .
I thought The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim and all of Southern California because the National League doesn't Count would have to play with only 8 players on the field this year .
March 13, 2010 at 06:53PM View BBCode
I recently read several articles that stated the the Angels will be replacing Chone Figgins with Brandon Wood at 3B.Is this possible ?
I was totally unaware the Figgins could be replaced .
I thought The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim and all of Southern California because the National League doesn't Count would have to play with only 8 players on the field this year .
Tyles
March 13, 2010 at 07:50PM View BBCode
While the Angels will technically field nine guys this season, the need to replace Chone Figgins at third means that the Angels will figuratively be playing shorthanded this year.