which is the better year?

CMH · 08-04-2002, 01:18 PM

Avg. HR RBI
.341 38 150

.319 45 110

you decide and then i'll let you know why i bring this up.

Hammer755 · 08-04-2002, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by YankeePride
Avg. HR RBI
.341 38 150

.319 45 110

you decide and then i'll let you know why i bring this up.

Based solely on the statistics provided, the first season is by far the better of the two.

Lancer010 · 08-04-2002, 01:47 PM

I agree. But I'd also like to know some defensive numbers.

And possibly BB and SB.

Specs · 08-04-2002, 01:47 PM

I say #2 because I'm guessing he won the MVP, so I bet his other stats were pretty good.

Hammer755 · 08-04-2002, 01:56 PM

Season 2 was Chipper Jones in 1999 - Baseball Reference, but I can't figure out where season 1 comes from. There have only been 2 150 RBI seasons in MLB and that one isn't either of them.

crackpott · 08-04-2002, 02:08 PM

I agree with Lancer. I'd need other stats. It's like someone who hit .330 with 40 HR and someone who hit .340 with 1. Give us just average and people will pick the .340 guy. OBP and SLG are the most important categories to me, so if you provide me those I'll make my decision.

Oliman37 · 08-04-2002, 04:17 PM

I'd have to agree, OPS is the best way to measure a who was a better player that year. Also, what was the team's record for each of those players?

DHS23 · 08-04-2002, 05:08 PM

The first one looks better based on those stats, but like said before, the second set could have a better OBP. To me, runs would be another good stat to include in here.

Bluenoser · 08-04-2002, 05:09 PM

This from the Baseball Almanac

Most Rbi's in a season

191 - Hack Wilson 1930

184 - Lou Gherig 1931

183 - Hank Greenburgh 1937

Chuck Klein also had 170 in 1930

CMH · 08-04-2002, 05:37 PM

yes it is Chipper Jones, the first year is 2004. the second year is 1999. i'm gonna offer all the stats. Chipper did not win MVP in 2004, just in case you were wondering.

Year G Avg HR RBI Runs BB SB H 2B 3B OBP SLG

1999 157 .319 45 110 116 126 25 181 41 1 .443 .633
2004 150 .341 38 150 127 81 1 199 47 10 .422 .652

in 1999 he obviously played in Atlanta. In 2004 he played in Texas. Texas finished with 98-64. I could find Atlanta's record in 1999 but I dont know where to start. However, I'm sure the record is very similar.

Unless OOTP4 takes into consideration ballpark factors then I dont see how 1999 could be a better year than 2004. The reason i ask is a small one. Nothin major and nothin that i'm too concerned with, however it does bother me.

Chipper in 2005 picked up his 2000th career hit and in his news story the 1999 season was regarded as his best year. I disagree. The reason i feel the game chose 1999 is because of the homeruns. Other than stolen bases and walks, Chipper was far more dominant in 2004 than in 1999.

Thats my opinion though...wat you guys think?

edit: i did a search on how to align the columns, no match...maybe someone can tell me later. thanks

QuestGAV · 08-04-2002, 05:39 PM

Manny hit .333/45/165 in 1999 with a .442 OBP in only 147 games and Palmeiro hit .324/47/148, those are the only reasonably close matches in 1999 to those numbers from Chipper.

Hank Greenberg hit .340/41/150 in 1940... mystery season #1 has piqued my curiosity

EDIT: D'oh, there's the answer.

Scott Vibert · 08-04-2002, 05:45 PM

Without knowing who won the MVP in 2004 its hard to tell if he was really deserving or if Jones was more deserving... comparing Jones to himself a few years earlier doesn't determine if he should have earned the MVP in 2004.

CMH · 08-04-2002, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ScottVib
Without knowing who won the MVP in 2004 its hard to tell if he was really deserving or if Jones was more deserving... comparing Jones to himself a few years earlier doesn't determine if he should have earned the MVP in 2004.

i'm not worried about the MVP award Scott.

my concern is that OOTP mentioned 1999 as his best year, and not 2004 in a news story about Chipper.

I believe its b/c he hit 7 more homeruns in 1999 than in 2004. Just a concern based on observations people have made on homeruns and the effect it has in OOTP.

edm · 08-04-2002, 06:26 PM

to allign the stats you need to use the "code" tag

Code:

Year   G  Avg HR RBI Runs BB  SB  H  2B 3B  OBP  SLG 
 
1999 157 .319 45 110 116  126 25 181 41 1  .443 .633 
2004 150 .341 38 150 127  81   1 199 47 10 .422 .652

Other than RBI's (which depends a lot on other factors, like teammates being on base) they are pretty comparable years imo. He did have 18 more hits in 2004, but I'll take the 7 more HR's in '99. He also has many more SB's, walks, and a higher OBP despite the lower batting average in '99. 10 triples in '04 is a lot though. Tough call, but I would not argue with either, both are great seasons.

CMH · 08-04-2002, 06:34 PM

well yea i agree. I think both seasons are very comparable. i think the OPS for both gives 1999 a small .002 advantage. I dont see a major difference in that and that only says the years were very comparable.

however, OOTP's news story only mentioned the average, homeruns, and rbi.

considering just those three...2004 was the better year. once again, i think homeruns gave the news story the perception that 1999 was a better year.

Carplos · 08-04-2002, 08:04 PM

Hmph, well, I WOULD say that OOTP mentioned that year, because it was the year he won MVP, but OOTP has no clue that he won MVP in 99, so it shouldn't matter.

crackpott · 08-04-2002, 08:43 PM

His OPS is very similar, however in '99 he still knew how to steal a base....

rferry · 08-05-2002, 05:04 AM

well they both seem very good. but to put the stts in context, you have to find out what role he played for the team. weighing the percentage of RBI's to the rest of the team may help.

CMH · 08-05-2002, 09:52 AM

ok you guys are gettin too complicated here...

all are asking good questions about OPS, quality of runs, RBI production by teammates, etc. but does OOTP4 consider all this??

If it did, then i would understand 1999 being the better year. Texas in 2004 was an offensive power surge and anyone with Chipper's skills would have had a year similar to 2004 playing for that team.

the problem is I dont think OOTP consider all this. The newstory only mentioned: Average, Homeruns, and RBI. That's it. I'm assuming that is all it really cared for and if thats the case, 2004 is by far the better year.

edm · 08-05-2002, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by YankeePride

the problem is I dont think OOTP consider all this. The newstory only mentioned: Average, Homeruns, and RBI. That's it. I'm assuming that is all it really cared for and if thats the case, 2004 is by far the better year.

I won't disagree that (if this is the case) 2004 would be the better year, but I would not say 'by far'.

To play devils advocate, assuming ootp does not put a lot of stock in the RBI differences, especially when both are over 100 (which I would agree with) don't get me wrong, RBI's are important, but they also have a lot to do with the team around you. So assuming that, you're left with his Avg and HR's. a 22 point difference from '99 to '04 was about 18 hits, and I'll take 7 more HR's over the 18 hits in a season any day. Why?, those 18 hits don't mean much if they came with 2 outs and no one on base. Sure if makes the average look better, but comparing .319 to .341 is not a huge jump imo.

08-04-2002, 01:47 PM	#3
Lancer010 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 171	I agree. But I'd also like to know some defensive numbers. And possibly BB and SB. __________________ "I broke my back" -- Mike Tyson Avatar Free Since April, 2002

08-04-2002, 01:56 PM	#5
Hammer755 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 2,348	Season 2 was Chipper Jones in 1999 - Baseball Reference, but I can't figure out where season 1 comes from. There have only been 2 150 RBI seasons in MLB and that one isn't either of them. Last edited by Hammer755; 08-04-2002 at 01:58 PM.

08-04-2002, 02:08 PM	#6
crackpott Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Toronto Posts: 2,961	I agree with Lancer. I'd need other stats. It's like someone who hit .330 with 40 HR and someone who hit .340 with 1. Give us just average and people will pick the .340 guy. OBP and SLG are the most important categories to me, so if you provide me those I'll make my decision. __________________ Abandoned Planet - Check it out. The photos don't suck anymore.

08-04-2002, 04:17 PM	#7
Oliman37 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 20	I'd have to agree, OPS is the best way to measure a who was a better player that year. Also, what was the team's record for each of those players? __________________ Every day I beat my own personal record for the number of consecutive days I've managed to stay alive. -George Carlin

08-04-2002, 05:37 PM	#10
CMH Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 5,057	yes it is Chipper Jones, the first year is 2004. the second year is 1999. i'm gonna offer all the stats. Chipper did not win MVP in 2004, just in case you were wondering. Year G Avg HR RBI Runs BB SB H 2B 3B OBP SLG 1999 157 .319 45 110 116 126 25 181 41 1 .443 .633 2004 150 .341 38 150 127 81 1 199 47 10 .422 .652 in 1999 he obviously played in Atlanta. In 2004 he played in Texas. Texas finished with 98-64. I could find Atlanta's record in 1999 but I dont know where to start. However, I'm sure the record is very similar. Unless OOTP4 takes into consideration ballpark factors then I dont see how 1999 could be a better year than 2004. The reason i ask is a small one. Nothin major and nothin that i'm too concerned with, however it does bother me. Chipper in 2005 picked up his 2000th career hit and in his news story the 1999 season was regarded as his best year. I disagree. The reason i feel the game chose 1999 is because of the homeruns. Other than stolen bases and walks, Chipper was far more dominant in 2004 than in 1999. Thats my opinion though...wat you guys think? edit: i did a search on how to align the columns, no match...maybe someone can tell me later. thanks Last edited by CMH; 08-04-2002 at 06:32 PM.

08-04-2002, 01:18 PM	#1
CMH Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 5,057	which is the better year? Avg. HR RBI .341 38 150 .319 45 110 you decide and then i'll let you know why i bring this up.

08-04-2002, 05:08 PM	#8
DHS23 All Star Reserve Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Modesto, CA Posts: 506	The first one looks better based on those stats, but like said before, the second set could have a better OBP. To me, runs would be another good stat to include in here.

08-04-2002, 05:09 PM	#9
Bluenoser Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In The Moment Posts: 14,542	This from the Baseball Almanac Most Rbi's in a season 191 - Hack Wilson 1930 184 - Lou Gherig 1931 183 - Hank Greenburgh 1937 Chuck Klein also had 170 in 1930

08-04-2002, 05:39 PM	#11
QuestGAV Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 2,010	Manny hit .333/45/165 in 1999 with a .442 OBP in only 147 games and Palmeiro hit .324/47/148, those are the only reasonably close matches in 1999 to those numbers from Chipper. Hank Greenberg hit .340/41/150 in 1940... mystery season #1 has piqued my curiosity EDIT: D'oh, there's the answer.

08-04-2002, 05:45 PM	#12
Scott Vibert Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: My Computer Posts: 8,275	Without knowing who won the MVP in 2004 its hard to tell if he was really deserving or if Jones was more deserving... comparing Jones to himself a few years earlier doesn't determine if he should have earned the MVP in 2004.

08-04-2002, 06:26 PM	#14
edm Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 2,007	to allign the stats you need to use the "code" tag Code: Year G Avg HR RBI Runs BB SB H 2B 3B OBP SLG 1999 157 .319 45 110 116 126 25 181 41 1 .443 .633 2004 150 .341 38 150 127 81 1 199 47 10 .422 .652 Other than RBI's (which depends a lot on other factors, like teammates being on base) they are pretty comparable years imo. He did have 18 more hits in 2004, but I'll take the 7 more HR's in '99. He also has many more SB's, walks, and a higher OBP despite the lower batting average in '99. 10 triples in '04 is a lot though. Tough call, but I would not argue with either, both are great seasons. Last edited by edm; 08-04-2002 at 06:44 PM.

08-04-2002, 06:34 PM	#15
CMH Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 5,057	well yea i agree. I think both seasons are very comparable. i think the OPS for both gives 1999 a small .002 advantage. I dont see a major difference in that and that only says the years were very comparable. however, OOTP's news story only mentioned the average, homeruns, and rbi. considering just those three...2004 was the better year. once again, i think homeruns gave the news story the perception that 1999 was a better year.

08-04-2002, 08:04 PM	#16
Carplos Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Idaho Posts: 2,908 Infractions: 1/0 (0)	Hmph, well, I WOULD say that OOTP mentioned that year, because it was the year he won MVP, but OOTP has no clue that he won MVP in 99, so it shouldn't matter.

08-04-2002, 08:43 PM	#17
crackpott Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Toronto Posts: 2,961	His OPS is very similar, however in '99 he still knew how to steal a base.... __________________ Abandoned Planet - Check it out. The photos don't suck anymore.

08-05-2002, 05:04 AM	#18
rferry All Star Reserve Join Date: May 2002 Location: DC Posts: 549	well they both seem very good. but to put the stts in context, you have to find out what role he played for the team. weighing the percentage of RBI's to the rest of the team may help. __________________ please excuse my grammar, i read baseball weekly in my high school english classes.

08-05-2002, 09:52 AM	#19
CMH Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 5,057	ok you guys are gettin too complicated here... all are asking good questions about OPS, quality of runs, RBI production by teammates, etc. but does OOTP4 consider all this?? If it did, then i would understand 1999 being the better year. Texas in 2004 was an offensive power surge and anyone with Chipper's skills would have had a year similar to 2004 playing for that team. the problem is I dont think OOTP consider all this. The newstory only mentioned: Average, Homeruns, and RBI. That's it. I'm assuming that is all it really cared for and if thats the case, 2004 is by far the better year.