Nolan Ryan is making me bald!

[David Watts]

Nolan Ryan may be the most frustrating pitcher I have ever had on a OOTP roster. WOW! My team(Astros) stinks, but when I first started managing it, the one bright spot appeared to be a young 22 year old Nolan Ryan. This is a random debut league in which it's always 1976. Ryan's first season started off miserably, but by August he kicked it into gear and finished the season with 14 wins. He gave up too many hits and walked way too many batters, but things were looking up. Along comes the second season and once again Ryan gets off to a horrible start. His control is an issue and he's giving up way too many hits. This time he stinks all the way to September, but then he's lights out for the final month. Still finishes the season with an era in the high 5's.

By this time, I have shopped him around numerous times( I manage only, so this goes against my rules of play, but he is bugging the crap out of me), but not a single teams shows interest. I figure things have to get better, right?

Third season roles in and I can't believe my eyes, Nolan Ryan is no longer a member of the starting rotation. He is the number 5 guy in my bullpen. A month into the season and I'm wondering why he's even on the team. I'm finding the only time it's safe to use him is mop up duty. Dude seems to think "on base percentage" is a pitchers stat and he's determined to lead the league. Now towards the end of the season, one of my starters gets hurt and is down for a couple of weeks. In steps Nolan and since it's September, he trots out a couple great starts. I start to wonder once again if he is starting to turn things around.

The 4th season began last night. My Astros lost Chris Capuano to free agency so I figured Nolan would be back in the rotation. Then at the last second we signed Bobby Jones. UGh! Yup, Nolan is sitting at the tail end of the bullpen once again. And if his first 2 appearances are the norm, the only thing that will save Mr Ryan is recalc

Bright side, the preseason predictions have my Astros winning their division. Our poor finish netted us the 2nd pick in the draft and we signed Mark Mcguire. Not one of my favorites, but when Darrell Porter was your teams home run leader the year before with 15, it would be silly to complain.

Why do I know that Ryan will bloom the minute he leaves my team?????

[r0nster]

curious ... have you noticed to see if Ryan starts strong in the game then flounders as the game goes on ??? IF so why not just stick him as your closer and see what happens ?? I have found that sometimes (once in a while) by putting them in a different role helps or putting them in AAA for a week or two.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by r0nster

curious ... have you noticed to see if Ryan starts strong in the game then flounders as the game goes on ??? IF so why not just stick him as your closer and see what happens ?? I have found that sometimes (once in a while) by putting them in a different role helps or putting them in AAA for a week or two.

I play with closers set to rarely, but that doesn't mean I didn't at least think about trying Nolan as my stopper. Thing is, he simply allows too many men to get on base. Not the guy you want when in a jam. I use reserve rosters, so AAA is not the answer. Funny thing is, he actually finished the 3rd season on the reserve roster.

[David Watts]

Conspiracy theorist have the reason for Nolan's struggles down to the fact that The Only Nolan is currently dominating the league when it comes to k's. This league evidently is a only big enough for one Nolan.

[The Game]

How many seasons does Ryan have in your league? He sucked until 1972 his 6th season. Don't forget his 1st year was 1966 then didn't play again in the majors until 68. While his era was decent he didnt win much and was not dominant. In all my RD leagues he always came in after age 40.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by The Game

How many seasons does Ryan have in your league? He sucked until 1972 his 6th season. Don't forget his 1st year was 1966 then didn't play again in the majors until 68. While his era was decent he didnt win much and was not dominant. In all my RD leagues he always came in after age 40.

That's one of the reasons I'm pulling my hair out. This should be the season he starts to put things together. He's 25, which would be 1972. Starting out in the bullpen is not a good sign, but I have to figure one of my starters will go down to injury and maybe Nolan can step in and shine. His control problems mirror his real life, but it's the hits allowed that differ. He's giving up too many hits.

Side note, I'm not complaining or dogging OOTP. These are the things that make the game fun.

[The Wolf]

If Darrell Porter is your best hitter then you are screwed beyond belief.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

If Darrell Porter is your best hitter then you are screwed beyond belief.

I've been finishing low and picking high. Last year I netted George Davis and Denard Span. This year I drafted(the computer) Mark Mcguire. I also have an aging Michael Young on my squad.

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

If Darrell Porter is your best hitter then you are screwed beyond belief.

Darrel Porter was a much under-appreciated hitter.....I won my very first Start-O-Matic Pennant (against other human beings) with Darrel Porter as my backstop (though he was not my best hitter)....but his 1979 season is one of the best ever, pre-steroids, for a catcher....

[The Wolf]

Darrell Porter had a career OPS of .763, ranking him in Bill James's Grade D for hitters. He was average, and if your best hitter is an only average hitter then you are indeed screwed.

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Darrell Porter had a career OPS of .763, ranking him in Bill James's Grade D for hitters. He was average, and if your best hitter is an only average hitter then you are indeed screwed.

Don't know were you get that malarkey......the average OPS was much less than .763 during Porter's career....and the average catcher's OPS was a whole lot lower than the overall average........if he put up the exact same numbers in 2000, then he could be considered average.....and he definitely was not an average drinker.....

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Questdog

Don't know were you get that malarkey......the average OPS was much less than .763 during Porter's career....and the average catcher's OPS was a whole lot lower than the overall average........if he put up the exact same numbers in 2000, then he could be considered average.....and he definitely was not an average drinker.....

I got that INFORMATION from Baseball Reference and from Bill James. You want to argue with Bill James, be my guest.

Porter was an average (career: .247/.354/.409) hitter. And if your best hitter is only average, yes, you're screwed.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

I got that INFORMATION from Baseball Reference and from Bill James. You want to argue with Bill James, be my guest.

Porter was an average (career: .247/.354/.409) hitter. And if your best hitter is only average, yes, you're screwed.

Funny thing is I never said he was my best hitter. I said Porter hit the most home runs for my team. His batting average was in the .240 range.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Funny thing is I never said he was my best hitter. I said Porter hit the most home runs for my team. His batting average was in the .240 range.

That's him. Twenty-some points above the Mendoza Line.

Who is your best hitter?

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

I got that INFORMATION from Baseball Reference and from Bill James. You want to argue with Bill James, be my guest.

Porter was an average (career: .247/.354/.409) hitter. And if your best hitter is only average, yes, you're screwed.

How can you be an average hitter when your OPS is above average for the era in which you played?.....true, his batting average was not spectacular, but that was one of the prejudices Bill James was instrumental in overcoming.....Porter walked a lot and had some power......his career OPS is at least 50 points higher than the average catcher of his era.....

P.S. and the career OPS was made depsite the fact that he played his whole career in two of the worst parks in baseball for a slow-running power hitter (Royals and Busch)......and it is also brought down by a few years when he was a useless drunk.....from 1977-79, he was probably the most productive catcher in baseball, then his drinking ruined his career.....

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by Questdog

How can you be an average hitter when your OPS is above average for the era in which you played?.....true, his batting average was not spectacular, but that was one of the prejudices Bill James was instrumental in overcoming.....Porter walked a lot and had some power......his career OPS is at least 50 points higher than the average catcher of his era.....

Darrell Porter was a great player. He was OBP before OBP was cool. I don't get how one can demean an excellent career by referencing the Mendozza line when only cavemen care about batting average.......

Darrell Porter played his entire career in cavernous multipurpose parks with about two and a half times the foul territory of any stadium in use today. The game was different. If you don't believe me, read Bill James.

Porter played from 1971 to 1987. He caught just over 1500 games. He had a career OPS+ of 113.

How many catchers caught at least 1500 games with an OPS+ of at least 110 during those years?

Four.

The other three are Fisk, Carter and Simmons.

The highest OPS+ of those three from '71-'87?

120.

Fisk, Carter, Simmons, and Porter. This group is elite, not average.

[tayloraj]

Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla

Fisk, Carter, Simmons, and Porter. This group is elite, not average.

It's worth noting, though, that Porter was clearly the worst out of that group (considerably shorter career, lowest OPS+ out of the four, to name a few reasons why). None of the other three are comparable to him (according to BBref similarity scores); his three best comparisons are Bill Freehan, Sherm Lollar and Jason Varitek, which are probably more fair comparisons for his level of ability. I don't really understand how he could be rated as a below-average hitter, but it's also kind of a stretch to say that he was elite, too.

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by tayloraj

It's worth noting, though, that Porter was clearly the worst out of that group (considerably shorter career, lowest OPS+ out of the four, to name a few reasons why). None of the other three are comparable to him (according to BBref similarity scores); his three best comparisons are Bill Freehan, Sherm Lollar and Jason Varitek, which are probably more fair comparisons for his level of ability. I don't really understand how he could be rated as a below-average hitter, but it's also kind of a stretch to say that he was elite, too.

When you are one of the top 5 or so players at your position for your career, how can you not be considered elite?.....

and I'd take Porter over Simmons, any day of the week, as a catcher.......I'd take him over Carter, too, but that's only 'cause Carter always rubbed be the wrong way......

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by tayloraj

It's worth noting, though, that Porter was clearly the worst out of that group (considerably shorter career, lowest OPS+ out of the four, to name a few reasons why). None of the other three are comparable to him (according to BBref similarity scores); his three best comparisons are Bill Freehan, Sherm Lollar and Jason Varitek, which are probably more fair comparisons for his level of ability. I don't really understand how he could be rated as a below-average hitter, but it's also kind of a stretch to say that he was elite, too.

Let me try...

Among the four players, only Simmons has a higher WPA than Porter. This is for the entire career of each player, not specifically for '71-'87.

Over 17 years, if you are in the top 4 at your position, you are elite.

ADD: The Similarity Scores are based on career numbers. Since Fisk, Carter, and Simmons all played longer they are more similar to each other than they are to Porter, based on that formula. Using Sim Score, Porter's most similar player is Bill Freehan (and Freehan's most similar is Porter). Though Freehan, like Porter, did not have a HOF career, he was also a great player who was an elite catcher of his time.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

I got that INFORMATION from Baseball Reference and from Bill James. You want to argue with Bill James, be my guest.

Porter was an average (career: .247/.354/.409) hitter. And if your best hitter is only average, yes, you're screwed.

In The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract, James ranks Porter as the 18th greatest catcher ever. A borderline HOFer.

So I'm really not sure what you think you got from Bill James. It wasn't that Porter was average, that's for sure.