Quote:
Originally Posted by majesty95
You guys are so focused on defense or defending the game or whatever your agenda is that you're completely overlooking the fact that there is ZERO reason why Roy Smalley should be playing DH over Rod Carew. I would also argue that the advantage that Hill has over Ventura defensively is minimal. Lastly, don't the star levels take into account defensive ratings?
|
I actually checked. I was sure in my mind that Carew was the better offensive player, but I looked it up to make sure. Carew's value was so much tied up in batting average that while he was great (the best hitter for average of his career) high average hitters are always overrated, while Smalley's value was more in power, which gets underrated relative to batting average.
But looking it up shows that conventional wisdom is absolutely right about Carew being clearly the better hitter, which we all "knew" but occasionally I find I "kinow" something and I look it up and was wrong. Carew's career OPS+ (on base plus slugging compared to the league, average = 100) was 131, or 31% better than the average hitter in the league; Smalley's was 103, just 3% better.
A defense-oriented manager looking for a middle infielder, well, Carew was a bad defensive 2B, bad enough to be moved to 1B, and had negative defensive WAR for his career.while Smalley was an above average defensive SS. I think if it were to play 2B (maybe not SS) I'd still rather have Carew, but I guess one could argue it.
But to play DH-- defense doesn't matter, so as you say there's no justification for Smalley over Carew. The only possible justification might be a few years where one of Carew's weakest seasons aligned with one of Smalley's best, like Carew in 1971 compared to Smalley in 1983; if it were using those seasons Smalley would be the better hitter...but that's grasping at straws.