HOF : Tim Raines

[mikev]

Originally Posted by ctorg

You know, I'm starting to think that writers are not well-equipped to be the ones voting guys into the HOF. They simply don't know the game well enough. Maybe they once did know more than most others, but they have clearly been far surpassed in their baseball knowledge by the fantasy baseball community in particular.

Just now starting to think that?

[zekester91]

Originally Posted by bababui

The fielding abilities are up for grabs and Dawson is better at baserunning than Raines is at hitting for power. And Dawsons arm saved more than a few runs for his pitching staff by making runners stop at second on a base hit with a runner at first.

I remember one game, on two consecutive fly balls to him with a runner on third he was throwing better stikes than the pitcher was that day

[sporr]

If you compare Raines to other leadoff hitters in the HOF or likely to be in the HOF, you'll find that Raines is at or above them in nearly every offensive category.

[sporr]

dola, for those who say Rice was the most feared hitter of his era (I've heard it and read it quite a bit), what is this based on? Stats or just a gut feeling? Stats simply don't back it up.

[Long_Long_Name]

Originally Posted by sporr

dola, for those who say Rice was the most feared hitter of his era (I've heard it and read it quite a bit), what is this based on? Stats or just a gut feeling? Stats simply don't back it up.

It reminds me of Vladimir Guerrero's last years with the Expos - it seemed every pitcher listed him as the most feared hitter in the NL. Yet... he wasn't the best.

[Hammer755]

Originally Posted by sporr

dola, for those who say Rice was the most feared hitter of his era (I've heard it and read it quite a bit), what is this based on? Stats or just a gut feeling? Stats simply don't back it up.

It's one of those myths that was repeated so much that eventually people took it as fact. Rob Neyer has a good article about the topic that I read on another forum, but it's from ESPN Insider so I don't want to re-post it.

[magnet]

My favorite take on Dawson

Originally Posted by FJM

I don't understand why Dawson supporters always cite his "ravaged knees" as a like thing that makes his numbers be better than they are. "He had bad knees! He gets bonus points!" You wouldn't say about Tony Gwynn: "The guy hit .320 every year -- and he was fat!" The Hawk had bad knees. That happens to athletes sometimes. Lou Gehrig had ****ing ALS and he was still better than basically everyone else.

[His Own Bad Self]

Andre Dawson was my first sports hero ever, so I hope he gets in eventually, but I don't know if I think he should be in or not.

[CMH]

Originally Posted by sporr

dola, for those who say Rice was the most feared hitter of his era (I've heard it and read it quite a bit), what is this based on? Stats or just a gut feeling? Stats simply don't back it up.

I don't agree with the "feared hitter" belief. What is that, really? Feared hitter? There's no way to really measure that.

I think his stats hold up as him being consistently better or at the higher echelon of players during his playing career (at least for close to a 10 year period).

The most feared thing needs to die, though.

[Splitter24]

Originally Posted by sporr

dola, for those who say Rice was the most feared hitter of his era (I've heard it and read it quite a bit), what is this based on? Stats or just a gut feeling? Stats simply don't back it up.

Because every time I've read/seen interviews with AL pitchers of that era, the one name that consistently pops up when asked to list guys that they hated to see walk to the plate was Jim Rice. As an example, read Goose Gossage's thoughts on the matter.

Maybe a lot of those pitchers didn't think that then, but say it now because it's been accepted over the years. I don't know.

And, BTW, if his stats don't back it up, whose stats from that era do? Which AL hitter did, then? Did anybody?

[CBL-Commish]

Originally Posted by Splitter24

And, BTW, if his stats don't back it up, whose stats from that era do? Which AL hitter did, then? Did anybody?

How about George Brett, who was nearly an exact contemporary of Rice and was intentionally walked nearly three times as often.

The '85 Royals weren't exactly Murderers Row or anything, but Brett was intentionally walked more times that season than Rice was in his three highest seasons combined.

In 1978 Rice batted in front of the 38-year-old Carl Yastrzemski the whole year and despite an OPS+ almost 50 points higher he was only IBB'ed seven times. This was a guy who was the first player to 400 total bases in a generation and AL pitchers were almost unanimous in saying "hey, I'd rather pitch to you than a 38-year-old DH with a .423 slugging percentage."

[bababui]

Originally Posted by ctorg

You know, I'm starting to think that writers are not well-equipped to be the ones voting guys into the HOF. They simply don't know the game well enough. Maybe they once did know more than most others, but they have clearly been far surpassed in their baseball knowledge by the fantasy baseball community in particular.

The stats fantasy baseball players rely on are very apropos for fantasy baseball but they are simply a two dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional game. While stats are a by-product of a baseball game, baseball itself is a game that often sacrifices maximum statistical performance for the sake of winning; ie grounding out to second to get a runner from second to third.

Also, there are social factors that might make a player important to a team. Is he good with his teammates? Will he help younger teammates develop? Will he make sacrifices (like playing out of position) for his team? Will he bitch and moan when either he or the team is in a slump?

For fantasy players to crow about their superior baseball knowledge proves that they have matched their sportswriter/broadcaster brothers in hubris.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by bababui

The stats fantasy baseball players rely on are very apropos for fantasy baseball but they are simply a two dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional game. While stats are a by-product of a baseball game, baseball itself is a game that often sacrifices maximum statistical performance for the sake of winning; ie grounding out to second to get a runner from second to third.

Also, there are social factors that might make a player important to a team. Is he good with his teammates? Will he help younger teammates develop? Will he make sacrifices (like playing out of position) for his team? Will he bitch and moan when either he or the team is in a slump?

For fantasy players to crow about their superior baseball knowledge proves that they have matched their sportswriter/broadcaster brothers in hubris.

Excellent post. Excellent points. How much more valuable than just the sum of his stats was Willie Stargell? A lot.

[sporr]

Originally Posted by CBL-Commish

In 1978 Rice batted in front of the 38-year-old Carl Yastrzemski the whole year and despite an OPS+ almost 50 points higher he was only IBB'ed seven times. This was a guy who was the first player to 400 total bases in a generation and AL pitchers were almost unanimous in saying "hey, I'd rather pitch to you than a 38-year-old DH with a .423 slugging percentage."

And the next year with Yastrzemski behind him he was intentionally walked just 4 times. The following year, Fred Lynn was intentionally walked 4 times...so pitchers could face Rice.

If you read this you'll see that, since 1950, there were 19 non-HOF players that had better OPS+ than Rice in a 12 year span (similar to the span of "good" years that Rice had). In fact, Fred Lynn, Rice's own teammate, was one of them.

[Jason Moyer]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Excellent post. Excellent points. How much more valuable than just the sum of his stats was Willie Stargell? A lot.

He must have been the greatest player ever then, because his stats are pretty ****ing impressive.

[mikev]

Originally Posted by bababui

The stats fantasy baseball players rely on are very apropos for fantasy baseball but they are simply a two dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional game. While stats are a by-product of a baseball game, baseball itself is a game that often sacrifices maximum statistical performance for the sake of winning; ie grounding out to second to get a runner from second to third.

I'm sorry, but unless it's a game winning sacrifice I don't see any benefit from making an out on purpose.

[Splitter24]

Originally Posted by CBL-Commish

How about George Brett, who was nearly an exact contemporary of Rice and was intentionally walked nearly three times as often.

The '85 Royals weren't exactly Murderers Row or anything, but Brett was intentionally walked more times that season than Rice was in his three highest seasons combined.

In 1978 Rice batted in front of the 38-year-old Carl Yastrzemski the whole year and despite an OPS+ almost 50 points higher he was only IBB'ed seven times. This was a guy who was the first player to 400 total bases in a generation and AL pitchers were almost unanimous in saying "hey, I'd rather pitch to you than a 38-year-old DH with a .423 slugging percentage."

And judging by the numbers that Rice put up that year, you're basically saying that AL pitchers were morons.

Yes, Yaz wasn't the player that he used to be, but at least he was still a decent hitter in '78 (OPS+ 112). The guy who hit most often after Brett in '85 was Jorge Orta, who hit a whopping .267 with 4 HR's and an OPS+ of 86 points lower than Brett (a much bigger drop off).

So let's look at the top 3 IBB guys in the AL in 1978:

Darrell Porter. Who hit behind him most often? Clint Hurdle (7 HR .264)

Rod Carew > Mike Cubbage (7 HR .282)

Fred Lynn > George Scott (12 HR .233)

Let's start with Carew. Both Carew and Cubbage were LH hitters, so teams weren't getting a platoon advantage. Cubbage had an OPS+ of 109, so he was an OK hitter. So why walk Carew, whose OPS+ was "only" 30 points higher? Well, 14 of Carew's 19 IBB's happened after July 1st. Cubbage's OPS in the 2nd half was a putrid .653.

Next, Porter/Hurdle. Again, both lefties. Both happened to have big platoon advantages vs. RH's. But Hurdle was a 20 year old rookie with no track record who was pretty much an average hitter that year (108 OPS+). Not a big surprise here.

Lynn/Scott. Platoon advantage. Lynn's OPS vs. RH: .982. Scott's OPS vs. RH: .659.

Rice/Yaz. Rice, as a %, had more IBB's vs. LHP's than RHP's. This makes sense given Rice was a RH and Yaz a LH. Rice had a OPS of .984 vs. RHP. Yaz had an .801. Against LHP, it was .931 vs. .756, basically the same dropoff.

So why wouldn't AL pitchers walk Rice more? I suppose it comes down to (and these are just theories):

1) The reluctance to give up a big inning by walking Rice to face Yaz, knowing full well that Fisk, Lynn and Evans were coming up behind Yaz.

2) Rice's propensity for grounding into DP's. Why walk him when you might get two outs out of him?

3) Yaz's All Star reputation (even though he was no longer a star)?

4) Rice had Rick Burleson and Jerry Remy in front of him, two guys who didn't have particulary good OBP's that year. So when Rice came up with nobody on base, there was no point in pitching around him?

5) I have no idea.

Anyway, this is the longest post I think I've ever written.

George Brett was a superb hitter. There OPS+ are virtually the same (except for Brett's 1980, which no one from that era could touch). But he was intentionally walked more than Rice because Rice usually had better hitters coming up behind him than Brett did. That shouldn't necessarily be a positive for rett and a negative for Rice. I don't think you can use IBB totals to make that point.

[bababui]

Originally Posted by mikev

I'm sorry, but unless it's a game winning sacrifice I don't see any benefit from making an out on purpose.

I dont mind a weaker hitter batting behind the runner to put him on 3rd with 1 out. For teams that arent the Red Sox or Yankees, this sort of small ball can steal wins.

[Splitter24]

Originally Posted by sporr

The following year, Fred Lynn was intentionally walked 4 times...so pitchers could face Rice.

So, Fred Lynn had by FAR the best year of his career that year. All 4 of his IBB were against RHP, against whom he had an OPS of 1.159. So, teams were gaining a platoon advantage by intentionally walking Lynn 4 times to face the RH hitter who had "only" a .939 OPS. And this is supposed to be an insult to Rice?

Or, to put it another way, despite being by far the best hitter in baseball in 1979, Fred Lynn was only intentionally walked 4 times because he had Jim Rice coming up behind him.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Jason Moyer

He must have been the greatest player ever then, because his stats are pretty ****ing impressive.

By all accounts he was one of the most personable people to ever play the game and also one of its greatest leaders. I've read that he was awarded the MVP award in 1979 not for his bat or glove but for his outstanding leadership.

Chuck Tanner, his long-time manager, once said about Stargell's presence and leadership that "When you had Willie Stargell on your team, it was like having a diamond ring on your finger."