You can help to rename the MLB MVP award the Josh Gibson Memorial MVP Award

[mitchkenn]

^^^
well said.

[Cool Papa Bell]

But just to add this, because it's context. If you are arguing that the game evolved over time, rules changed, you can't compare era because of equipment, mound distance, mound height, on and on, then you know what else people like you love to forget? Major League Baseball was missing upwards of 40% of it's major league talent because of a racist color barrier.

You can blow smoke and look in fun house mirrors all you want and make it seem that the Negro Leagues were not major league caliber because of barnstorming (they made more money and lots of white people in rural America paid good hard-earned money to see them play which should tell you a lot) or they played a short schedule because they couldn't travel on trains like normal human beings and had to rely on other means to get around when they could, or black newspapers were they only ones who carried their stories and some of them were burned down or forced out of business, or they slept where they could because hotels wouldn't rent them rooms. But facts tell everyone with half a brain that obviously a 100% white league was missing something. Can't quite put my finger on it, I'm sure someone someday might be able to figure it all out. Since today nearly half of MLB is not white there has to be some clues in there somewhere, not sure what they might be.

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by Cool Papa Bell

Ok, let's stop it already. Why do guys like you love to put words where no words were. Who said the 1880's games shouldn't count? I surely didn't, did I?

You started this *whole* segment by saying

Originally Posted by Cool Papa Bell

I do have to say though, it's awesome you put stock into stats where guys were pitching underhand and there was no mound and players didn't even wear gloves and you got 9 balls and 7 strikes and sometimes walks were considered hits, sometimes they weren't. Good stuff man, you go with that.

Yeah, you better stop, because you're not adding up either.

I put stock into the stats of the 1883 Boston Beaneaters. I put no stock in the stats of the 1930 Detroit Stars.

Your constant musing how the AL/NL major leagues were missing 40% (or whatever share) of their talent doesn't mean anything, either. From a recordkeeping perspective that wouldn't even matter, had the Negro Leagues kept records worth writing home about.

This topic is dead. You're on your crusade. And I call out BS when I see it.

[Cool Papa Bell]

What on earth dude? Just because I said you put stock in guys pitching underhand with no gloves doesn't mean I discounted them. I said you put stock into those, but not Negro League stats. I love early baseball, I have segments on it all the time. But there you go, you love to put words where no words were when it suits you. But can't put words where they belong when they don't suit you. That is pretty obvious. The only topic that is a dying one are people who can't admit that black baseball players were capable of playing Major League Baseball before 1947. They did pretty well for themselves from then on out, curious that the argument you are making is that they couldn't before that. Talk about something making no sense and total BS, that would be it.

[dkgo]

Originally Posted by Cool Papa Bell

You know, honestly no one can make up better entertainment than you guys. There are I believe 44 single season batting records and 35 single season pitching records listed, Negro League players are listed at the top of of 3 or 4 each, yet somehow it's nearly all are owned by Negro Leaguers? What the? Did you even click past the first 1? My goodness, that's about as numbnuts a comment as it gets. Entertaining though!

AVG, SLG, OPS, ERA, WHIP, those are all the major rate statistics except for Bonds who still has OBP. And of course also the ones like ERA+ and OPS+ although those are obviously going to heavily correlate to the previous ones so I won't count them twice. Pedro's unbelievable 2000 WHIP being usurped on the leaderboard by some guy who pitched just 22 innings defies common sense and is an insult to baseball history.

No ****ing **** someone didn't have more total homeruns in a 30 game "season". Context clues dude.

[Cool Papa Bell]

Originally Posted by dkgo

AVG, SLG, OPS, ERA, WHIP, those are all the major rate statistics except for Bonds who still has OBP. And of course also the ones like ERA+ and OPS+ although those are obviously going to heavily correlate to the previous ones so I won't count them twice.

No ****ing **** someone didn't have more total homeruns in a 30 game "season". Context clues dude.

I guess you missed the context clue from Baseball Reference that says the stats are still a work in progress. Context clues dude. Wait, better yet, read the King's English dude. But I do love the post about they have all the single season records though. 5 out of 70 is not context clue enough for you?

[dkgo]

I didn't realize I had to specify rate stats and not counting stats when the topic of discussion is that the seasons were only a small number of games. But for the benefit of some people here I should have added that to the post. You got me, good job.

[Cool Papa Bell]

Oh man, I am so sorry I am not as samart as you, boy you told me. Look man, Tetelo Vargas is not going to end up with the highest batting average in a season. Why do you guys get so upset about the work that's being done? Clearly, they have said it and have been saying it for a long time now, that all of this is a work in progress. My goodness, are you people doing what? Checking these stats daily to see who was at the top of leaderboards? You didn't even know or even care about any of them until this announcement. But oh boy, gotta weigh in on it now though. I sincerely wish people like you had as much enthusiasm for the why it took this long and why there was even a segregated Major League Baseball, as you do about finding whatever 5 out of 70 meaningless statistics you don't even care about have been temporarily changed. It's kind of pathetic really.

[dkgo]

Well yes, people generally weigh in on changes when changes are announced. The updates were literally done today so that is why it is being talked about today. Maybe they will change things later during the "work in progress" and when they do then that can be discussed, but for now all we have is what was actually done.

I admire your passion on the subject. I think someone can recognize that many Negro League players were MLB caliber ballplayers without distorting the actual MLB record book. In fact by throwing all the stats together it seems like MLB is hoping to hide the fact that they segregated the sport and the Negro Leagues ever happened in the first place. I would prefer an effort to celebrate and showcase the history that those leagues and players do have.

[dkgo]

Good luck with your MVP renaming efforts. I hope Gibson gets the recognition he deserves. But I still think it is a bit silly for baseball-reference to list a 22 inning season as the best WHIP of all time.

[Cool Papa Bell]

Originally Posted by dkgo

Good luck with your MVP renaming efforts. I hope Gibson gets the recognition he deserves. But I still think it is a bit silly for baseball-reference to list a 22 inning season as the best WHIP of all time.

Thank you, appreciate that. It's not my effort though, I'm ok with whether it's Branch Rickey, Frank Robinson or Josh Gibson. In having to pick one, I'll go with what Gibson represents, it's not about him as a player but symbolic to the 3,400+ guys who never had the opportunity to even try because of a color barrier. I don't disagree with you on the 22 IP season being listed, makes no sense and they have to get some things together and I'm sure they will. But prior to that, the player listed for ERA for example in Keefe didn't qualify either but no one said a word. It's just a database, it's not even the official record of MLB. It's just Baseball Reference, go to the MLB website and you won't find any Negro League Players listed yet.

I guess where I get peeved is many guys, and I'm not saying you, that was very gracious of you, just don't get the difficulty here. With no knowledge whatsoever of the conditions these guys were playing under, the why they were, the effort to keep it that way for decades, and to not put that into context is not fair to them. This was a systemic effort done literally in all facets of society not just baseball, for generations. You can't put that into a nice, neat standings and sortable database that can be compared over eras. It's like archaeology. Look at it this way, did we have to have a nice neat record of the Egyptians to know they were a great civilization, or did the remnants left behind and the little written accounts that survived tell us they were. Did we have to see a live dinosaur to know their approximate weight and what they could do? I know that sounds corny, but it's almost the same way with the Negro Leagues. There are so many efforts to discredit, belittle, minimize, it's frustrating. Especially when you know deep down what the reason is for it.

[Antonin]

Originally Posted by Cool Papa Bell

Thank you, appreciate that. It's not my effort though, I'm ok with whether it's Branch Rickey, Frank Robinson or Josh Gibson. In having to pick one, I'll go with what Gibson represents, it's not about him as a player but symbolic to the 3,400+ guys who never had the opportunity to even try because of a color barrier.

Very well said.

Originally Posted by Cool Papa Bell

...There are so many efforts to discredit, belittle, minimize, it's frustrating. Especially when you know deep down what the reason is for it.

It's very sad that even on this forum, here in the 21st century, there are people in the "discredit, belittle, minimize" faction. Please see my earlier comments on our having to work twice as hard to get half as far.

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by Antonin

It's very sad that even on this forum, here in the 21st century, there are people in the "discredit, belittle, minimize" faction. Please see my earlier comments on our having to work twice as hard to get half as far.

Ironically, Eugene Bremer made it all the way to the top of the single-season ERA leaderboard while working about one third the amount of innings we consider "qualifying" even in that era.

Question: if Jacob deGrom (0.56 ERA in 64 IP this year) has his arm come off before his start today, would you support him winning the NL ERA title this year and as long as we're on it the Cy Young too, and for him to be anointed the all-time, single-season ERA leader?

A) Yes.
B) No.

If B, please elaborate why. If A, you don't value baseball stats nearly enough to be a part of the discussion.

And please take note again that I could not care less whether you or Player X are white, black, brown, green, or blue. I very much care for the career stats page being in order, which it is currently not. I've been accused of lacking perspective in this topic because I didn't grow up amid racial tensions (paraphrasing freely). I very much feel like the opposite is very much the case when it comes to these horrendously incomplete statistics. Maybe some of you should start looking at them while covering the player picture with a hand.

[Cool Papa Bell]

Originally Posted by Westheim

And please take note again that I could not care less whether you or Player X are white, black, brown, green, or blue. I very much care for the career stats page being in order, which it is currently not. I've been accused of lacking perspective in this topic because I didn't grow up amid racial tensions (paraphrasing freely). I very much feel like the opposite is very much the case when it comes to these horrendously incomplete statistics. Maybe some of you should start looking at them while covering the player picture with a hand.

Again, and I know based on all your comments you have a hard time comprehending. How many times does someone have to list that everything you are seeing on a website, which isn't even the official record of MLB but that's besides the point, is still undergoing evaluation and updating and will be for quite some time.

I'm not accusing you of lacking perspective. You literally do lack perspective, it's fact not accusation. Until yesterday, you had no idea that Tim Keefe who doesn't qualify for a single season record in ERA either, was the lowest ERA listed. But yet, until yesterday, it was ok. But now, oh no not that black guy, it's a travesty. Eugene Bremmer is likely to not remain there, on a website that is not even anything but a database for reference, as the leader in single season ERA. But the guy who pitched underhand, not wearing a glove, with 9 balls and 7 strikes for a count, from a 54 foot distance and no mound, and on and on, and didn't qualify either, it's ok he was the previous single season record holder for lowest ERA in a season.

You see why I think you are a racist clown right?

[Cool Papa Bell]

I am curious about your question though. What exactly does Baseball Reference, a database site, have to do with Cy Young Awards? If you go to the actual MLB website, deGrom is actually listed as the lowest ERA in a season right now.

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by Cool Papa Bell

Again, and I know based on all your comments you have a hard time comprehending. How many times does someone have to list that everything you are seeing on a website, which isn't even the official record of MLB but that's besides the point, is still undergoing evaluation and updating and will be for quite some time.

I'm not accusing you of lacking perspective. You literally do lack perspective, it's fact not accusation. Until yesterday, you had no idea that Tim Keefe who doesn't qualify for a single season record in ERA either, was the lowest ERA listed. But yet, until yesterday, it was ok. But now, oh no not that black guy, it's a travesty. Eugene Bremmer is likely to not remain there, on a website that is not even anything but a database for reference, as the leader in single season ERA. But the guy who pitched underhand, not wearing a glove, with 9 balls and 7 strikes for a count, from a 54 foot distance and no mound, and on and on, and didn't qualify either, it's ok he was the previous single season record holder for lowest ERA in a season.

You see why I think you are a racist clown right?

Like I literally told you yesterday. That's the absolute most basic requirement, and I don't caim it's a great one. But Bremer fails even that:

Originally Posted by Westheim

105 innings in 83 games. Beats at the very least the 1 IP per game played by the team threshold.

Bremer? Even if the stats were true, 50.2 IP in 53 games doesn't cut it.

It's Bremer with one M, too. Get your facts straight.

By the way. Cut your racism crap. It's tiresome. If you can't make an argument without getting color involved, don't make the argument.

Originally Posted by Cool Papa Bell

I am curious about your question though. What exactly does Baseball Reference, a database site, have to do with Cy Young Awards?

Nothing. The question was

if Jacob deGrom (0.56 ERA in 64 IP this year) has his arm come off before his start today, would you support him winning the NL ERA title this year and as long as we're on it the Cy Young too, and for him to be anointed the all-time, single-season ERA leader?

A) Yes.
B) No.

Baseball-reference has no part in this question. It doesn't matter whether they'd put him atop there, or on MLB.com, ESPN, Wikipedia, or a bathroom wall in Nashville, Tennessee.

Originally Posted by Cool Papa Bell

If you go to the actual MLB website, deGrom is actually listed as the lowest ERA in a season right now.

That is today. I am talking about the season being complete.

If Jacob deGrom (0.56 ERA in 64 IP this year) has his arm come off before his start today, and he would not throw another pitch this year, would you, upon completion of the 2021 MLB season, support him winning the NL ERA title this year and as long as we're on it the Cy Young too, and for him to be anointed, by a publication or website of your choosing, the all-time, single-season ERA leader?

A) Yes.
B) No.

[Cool Papa Bell]

Oh wow sorry, typos are points off ok got it. But right now Bremer does qualify based on criteria. And in looking back at it, so did Keefe. It's known stats in a database, you are ok with qualifying stats as they are presented it seems.

And yeah yeah yeah, they are still being worked on and will be updated over time as more research is done and are incomplete right now, but that has been pointed out countless times. How much longer for the research to be done to be complete in your mind? Another month, another year, another 40 years? Everything should wait until it's perfect?

Why can't you wrap your mind around anything? It's archaeology on this, do people stop researching anything historical? When will it be good enough for people like you? If you can't wrap your head around what you are dealing with and keep bringing up the same pointless arguments, which happen to be the same pointless arguments racists have brought up for decades, then how do you expect to not be lumped in with them? But no, just criticize, do nothing helpful. How about you come on the livestream and we talk about it. I'd love to get your opinions, it would be awesome.

[Cool Papa Bell]

And I have to say, I personally don't care if deGrom is named as the record hold in anything. It doesn't matter, no one literally should care as much as you do about this from the standpoint you are using. But you're making all of this out to be like some vendetta. If people like you had said something about this years ago, maybe more research would have been done, maybe more people would have been interested, maybe the stats would be more complete. But oh no, not even on your radar but you act as if now trying to get it right is some affront to baseball history. You know what was an affront? Not including them. Not including to play, not including their work, not including their efforts, not including their statistics, not including them in society in general. STF up, that is what is the injustice, not whether Eugene Bremer is temporarily listed as the lowest ERA of all time in a single season. How about you put the same effort into fixing something worth fixing.

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by Cool Papa Bell

When will it be good enough for people like you?

When the wins and the losses and the at-bats add up to something that remotely makes sense, like, you know, nine batters per game played and so on. Until then, the entirety of it has no weight and value, and until then the Negro Leagues are not major leagues in the sense that they meat the minimum level of organization and documentation of a major league. And until the Negro Leagues are a major league, Josh Gibson can't have his name on the MVP trophy, because he never played major league baseball.

Until then, Branch Rickey, who hit all of three major league home runs, makes indeed more sense as a selection - even though it's still a terrible selection. Heck. Frank Robinson makes more sense than those two combined and squared.

[CONN CHRIS]

Originally Posted by Westheim

... And until the Negro Leagues are a major league, Josh Gibson can't have his name on the MVP trophy, because he never played major league baseball.

I would step in to suggest that you quit while you're behind but you've dug yourself a fortress so far beneath Stone Moutain that I doubt you would hear me at this point.