Time Warp HOF Ballot 1975

[jeheinz72]

Ormiston
Cook
Liao Jr.
Booker
Lemmings
O'Hara
Ward
Whitt
Tjeek-Willink
Makris

[Elendil]

Ormiston
Cook
Joyce
Liao
Booker
Lemmings
Whitt
Stell
Tjeenk-Willink
Makris

I wish voters would look more at the parks guys played in. Cook was harmed by his home park most of his career, as was Tjeenk-Willink. Woodworth was helped.

[ifspuds]

Booker
Lemmings
Ward
Whitt
Tjeenk-Willink
Makris
Granger

[metsgeek]

Booker
Arbour
Lemmings
Ayers
Johnson
Liao, Jr.
Zimyanin
Joyce
Tjeenk- Willink
Makris

[jdw]

Originally Posted by Elendil

I wish voters would look more at the parks guys played in. Cook was harmed by his home park most of his career, as was Tjeenk-Willink. Woodworth was helped.

.245/.350/.487/.838 Home
.242/.349/.478/.828 Road

That's insignificant. Home Park Advantage is clicked on in the game, so that's little more than the home park. Yankee Stadium *wasn't* a good park in his career:

Yankee - NYA
AVG RHB: 101
AVG LHB: 100
HR RHB: 92
HR LHB: 98
2B: 97
3B: 81

This is a home filed advantage:

.266/.317/.496/.813 Home (218 HR's)
.255/.309/.402/.711 Road (122 HR's)

That's Willard Schwarz.

Wood really wasn't helped by his park in an odd way.

I reality, Cook wasn't terribly harmed by his parks. STL was a good hitters park. Not great, but good. Cincy was a pitchers park, a pretty strong one. Overall, it evened out and he "hit better at home" a bit more than Wood did. I chalked it up to home field factor.

Lex pitcher "better at home"... frank, much better at home than Wood hit at home. 0.22 of ERA is more significant than .010 of OPS. Again, I chalked it up to home field advantage. CLE was and is a hitters park, especially with the long ball. The long ball didn't really harm Lex *that* much since he was an extreme Stuff pitcher and a good control pitcher, so the WHIP was strong and he kept runners off the bases. No disimilar to Mick Vagness, though Mick frankly has been a vastly better pitcher over his career, both at his peak and in terms of career (which isn't fair given Lex's CEI).

Ken Chaucer and Sunny Davie, in contrast, were guys who had their HR power in their prime crushed by their home parks. They're pretty good examples to look up for TWB's park effects. And of course Willard.

John

[jdw]

Originally Posted by Vris

And Woodworth is a poor man's Schwartz. If he can't get in, then I don't think Woodworth should.

Willard isn't remotely close to Wood:

OPS+
128 - Woodworth, Wilford
104 - Schwarz, Willard

Our version of OPS+ doesn't factor in park factors - it's just against the League Average.

Willard played in the Greatest Hitters Park In League History, in the high run era of the mid-20s through 30s:

.266/.317/.496/.813 Home (218 HR's)
.255/.309/.402/.711 Road (122 HR's)

If we went back and park adjusted Willard, he would be *below* 100 for his career. 100 is "league average", and in this case would include pitchers. 100 isn't "average" - it's "bad". And Willard wouldn't ever be that if we took away his park.

Wood again:

.245/.350/.487/.838 Home
.242/.349/.478/.828 Road

Wood was a better power hitter, and he drew a lot of walks.

.294/.372/.480/.852 Ted McMurray
.244/.350/.483/.833 Wilford Woodworth

I'm not saying that Wood is a better hitter than those Teddie. He wasn't. But people focus on his BA. It misses the following points:

* he had exceptional power.

He had more power than McMurray, and Teddie was one of the best power hitters of his generation in the *other* league.

* he drew a good number of walks, which led to a good OBP

He doesn't have the OBP that Teddie does, but a .350 clip isn't that of a one dimensional hitter.

* he was an excellent 3B

The Yanks had a Flyball and Strikeout staff. They had a number of great defensive IF's in the 50s, and their Gold Glove wins were light in the IF... and high in the OF. *Poor* defensive OF's like Stew and Turk won Gold Gloves out there, while excellent to great defenderes like Valcarcel, Estevez and Wood *never* won a GG as Yankees. (Valc and Estevez won six with the Tribe).

Wood is TWB's Darrel Evans. An excellent power hitter, a strong glove at 3B, a very good eye, one great year that overshadows the rest of his career that people don't realize how good it is, and low BA that causes people to underestimate him.

I don't heavily advocate Wood. I usually just vote for him. But he really was a heck of a 3B. I'd take him on my team over Noel any day. Noel was easily replaceable, and locked into 1B as a bad 1B. Wood was harder to replace, and if you came up with another 3B whose bat you wanted to get in the lineup, Wood was versatile enough to go out and player both left and right field.


John

[Elendil]

Originally Posted by jdw

Yankee - NYA
AVG RHB: 101
AVG LHB: 100
HR RHB: 92
HR LHB: 98
2B: 97
3B: 81

Wow, OK. I forgot about TWB's park effects' not matching real life.

[jdw]

Originally Posted by Elendil

Wow, OK. I forgot about TWB's park effects' not matching real life.

TWB's park factors have their own lives.


John

[rudel.dietrich]

Suprised at the support for Ward

[tward13]

Originally Posted by Fallschirmjager

Suprised at the support for Ward

Why? In our TWB world he's Ozzie Smith. Be interesting if there was one of those "most similar player" scores run for them because it would incredibly high. Their offensive numbers and defensive numbers are very close.

Only difference, the voters for the real life HoF voted Ozzie in 1st ballot with 91.7% of the vote.

[canadiancreed]

Most similiar players

1. Rex Seelinger (850)
2. Elmer Menard (845)
3. Herm Vardaman (842)
4. Carlyle Osborne (842)
5. Sean Carlin (839)
6. Ben Lutske (815)
7. Kenneth Whitt (813)
8. Ike Walker (813)
9. Rob Forrestal (800)
10. Wilbur Taylor (797)

THis is according to old cat so anything after 1968 isn't accounted for. Almost a whose who for MI's

[tward13]

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

Most similiar players

1. Rex Seelinger (850)
2. Elmer Menard (845)
3. Herm Vardaman (842)
4. Carlyle Osborne (842)
5. Sean Carlin (839)
6. Ben Lutske (815)
7. Kenneth Whitt (813)
8. Ike Walker (813)
9. Rob Forrestal (800)
10. Wilbur Taylor (797)

THis is according to old cat so anything after 1968 isn't accounted for. Almost a whose who for MI's

Thanks, but I was meaning a comparison to Smith's numbers. And do these comparisons you listed include defense?

[canadiancreed]

Originally Posted by tward13

Thanks, but I was meaning a comparison to Smith's numbers. And do these comparisons you listed include defense?

ya got me. I'ts just what's listed in cato, but let's do a comparison.

Games: Ward - 2453, Ozzie - 2573
AB: W - 8945, O - 9396
R: W - 1176, O - 1257
H: W - 2382, O - 2460
2B: W - 353, O - 402
3B: W - 83, O - 69
HR: W - 173, O - 28
RBI: W - 1014, O - 793
SB: W - 15, O - 580
CS: W - 15, O - 148
BB:K: W - 924:1464, O - 1072:589
AVG: W - .266, O - .262
OBP: W - .335, O - .337
SLG: W - .382, O - .328

Gold Gloves: W - 12, O - 13

WS Rings - W - 2/3, O - 1/3

[fhomess]

Cato does NOT compare defense.

[jdw]

810 Similarity Score between Ward and Ozzie.

750-799 = vaguely similar
800-849 = somewhat similar
850-899 = essentially similar
900-949 = truly similar
950+ = unusually similar

Their areas of similarity:

Position
G
AB
R
H
BB
BA

The first is far and away the most important - if one of them were a 2B, it would have dropped the similarity below 800.

The BA is reasonably important since it's a 1 similarity point for every point in BA. Adds up fast.

Hit's and runs can add up. Oz did score more runs, but only enough to add up to 7 point.

Areas not similar:

HR
RBI
SB
SLG

The first is rather monsterous - 145 more HR's for Denny, which is 72 points. A 72 point hit in any *single* category is enough to sink a comp below 900 - even close things like their BA's (.265-.262) bleeds three points. When you eat a -72 you're going to pick up enough of the others to drop you below 900.

The other ones are all 22-28 point drops.

If James factored in "defensive quality" in addition to "defensive position", with Gold Glove being the key "quality" factor, that would push them extremely close together: 13 vs. 12. There would be some "minus" since there is a 1 GG glove, but that likely would be a smaller minus compared to the other ones Dennis ate which would now have a reduced impact.

Some others:

879 Concepcion
870 Pee Wee Reese
810 Ozzie
798 Aparicio

I tend to think Davey and Pee Wee are closer to his type than Ozzie and Louie.

John

[tward13]

Originally Posted by jdw

810 Similarity Score between Ward and Ozzie.

750-799 = vaguely similar
800-849 = somewhat similar
850-899 = essentially similar
900-949 = truly similar
950+ = unusually similar

Their areas of similarity:

Position
G
AB
R
H
BB
BA

The first is far and away the most important - if one of them were a 2B, it would have dropped the similarity below 800.

The BA is reasonably important since it's a 1 similarity point for every point in BA. Adds up fast.

Hit's and runs can add up. Oz did score more runs, but only enough to add up to 7 point.

Areas not similar:

HR
RBI
SB
SLG

The first is rather monsterous - 145 more HR's for Denny, which is 72 points. A 72 point hit in any *single* category is enough to sink a comp below 900 - even close things like their BA's (.265-.262) bleeds three points. When you eat a -72 you're going to pick up enough of the others to drop you below 900.

The other ones are all 22-28 point drops.

If James factored in "defensive quality" in addition to "defensive position", with Gold Glove being the key "quality" factor, that would push them extremely close together: 13 vs. 12. There would be some "minus" since there is a 1 GG glove, but that likely would be a smaller minus compared to the other ones Dennis ate which would now have a reduced impact.

Some others:

879 Concepcion
870 Pee Wee Reese
810 Ozzie
798 Aparicio

I tend to think Davey and Pee Wee are closer to his type than Ozzie and Louie.

John

Thanks for working that. And yes from an offensive perspective, at their positions I probably would have guessed Pee Wee. But I was also mentally factoring in defense which brings him a lot closer to Ozzie than the others. And not just the GGs but things like range, etc.

[jdw]

Defensively, he's Ozzie a few decades early. Offensively... he's not.

One thing of interest is that Ward's 104 OPS+ "looks bad" in this company:

134 2B/SS Alan Liao Jr.,
124 SS Kenneth Whitt
122 SS Roger Joyce
114 2B/SS Doug Williams
104 SS Dennis Ward

But in this class:

104 Dennis Ward
99 Pee Wee
88 Concepcion
87 Ozzie
82 Aparicio

Granted, there are two points that need to be made:

(a) OPS+ misses some of the key offensive skills of some of those players - SB/CS

321/109 SB/CS Concepcion
580/148 SB/CS Ozzie
506/136 SB/CS Aparicio

Pee Wee also stole 200+ bases, and while we don't have his full record of CS, he looks very good for the period that we have the data.

Davey was a good percentage base stealer. Ozzie and Aparicio were rather exceptional, and at a higher volume.

I don't think it boost the two super high. Just to acknowledge that they are better than their OPS+

(b) our OPS+ is not park adjusted, while the ones for the real players are

Well, we do have Cato for all but 1969 of his career. He had less than 150 PA's that season before retiring. I'll leave off 1951 since that was a 10 PA September call up. His full seasons:

96 - 1952 CIN
91 - 1953 CIN
89 - 1954 CIN
85 - 1955 CIN
99 - 1956 CIN
95 - 1957 CIN
85 - 1958 CIN
92 - 1959 CIN
99 - 1960 SFG
102 - 1961 SFG
101 - 1962 SFG
93 - 1963 SFG
101 - 1964 NYN
96 - 1965 NYN
85 - 1966 NYN
101 - 1967 NYN
103 - 1968 NYN

Which isn't surprising to folks who followed the league. Our Crosley was a pitchers park. Our Candlestick is a semi-nuetral park. Our Shea isn't as extreme of a pitchers park as the real one, but it isn't a hitters park.

Over the course of his career, Ward played in parks that leaned towards the pitcher. He was a better than the 104 OPS+ indicates. Not massively. But the PF's, if factored in, would help him stay comfortably ahead of the real life guys I listed.

If you ask me if I'm surprised by all of this, I am. I didn't expect Ozzie, Pee Wee and Concepcion to have as low of OPS+ as they did.

John

[rudel.dietrich]

I dont trust OOTP when it comes to defense
And OOTPs Gold Glove selection is erractic to say the best

And since 6.5 does not even save even the simplist of defensive statistics it makes it extremly difficult to go back and judge a player on his glove alone

So it comes down to how much I remember that player and how he compares to those in his era at the same posistion

Ward offensivly was slightly above league average for his posistion
He pales when compared to Whitt, Joyce, Liao and Kreit and a few others

So does his runs saved with his defense make up for his runs produced with his bat enough to gain parity with the likes of Kreit and Liao Jr who are the HOF MI standard for the era?

Well since OOTP 6.5 is criminaly lacking in defensive statistics their is no way to find out

But my memories of the era and going on what I can find with the satistics at hand...

No he did not
And the gap is still rather wide

An amazing defensive SS (even if one ignores the glitter of gold gloves he is still amazing)
But it cannot bridge the gulf between how many runs he failed to produce when up against the likes of Liao Jr or Kreit

And the standard for middle infielders is better than it used to be
Not only must they be solid on defense they are also now expected to contribute on offense

I am not going to say Ward is a black hole at the plate
He is not by any means

But his denfence does not earn back the runs he did not produce at the plate
That is the long and the short of it for me

I can see how someone would elect him if they placed a large emphasis on defense
He is not a very good HOF in my opinion but he in no way will tarnish the HOF like some of the others who have been elected

He is also hurt by the era he comes into

You have Whitt and Liao Jr and Kreit which are the elite of the MI for the era

Then you have Joyce and Williams who are just on the outside for me (I might toss in a vote for Joyce when some space on my ballot opens up)

Then a tier below that is Ward

If I am not going to vote for Williams and Joyce then there is no way in hell I am going to vote for Ward

Williams was 80% of the defense of Ward AND had a much better bat

And those 20% on defense do not really count for that many runs


So the gold gloves are impressive
But do not mean that much to me and I think many voters are blinded by the shine of all that gold and did not stop to think of the numbers behind everything or the era that he played in

But I am not really looking to trash the man
As I said before, if he is elected he will in no way tarnish the HOF

More just pointing out why I voted for him and explaining my suprise over his support

[tward13]

Originally Posted by Fallschirmjager

I dont trust OOTP when it comes to defense
And OOTPs Gold Glove selection is erractic to say the best

And since 6.5 does not even save even the simplist of defensive statistics it makes it extremly difficult to go back and judge a player on his glove alone

So it comes down to how much I remember that player and how he compares to those in his era at the same posistion

Ward offensivly was slightly above league average for his posistion
He pales when compared to Whitt, Joyce, Liao and Kreit and a few others

So does his runs saved with his defense make up for his runs produced with his bat enough to gain parity with the likes of Kreit and Liao Jr who are the HOF MI standard for the era?

Well since OOTP 6.5 is criminaly lacking in defensive statistics their is no way to find out

But my memories of the era and going on what I can find with the satistics at hand...

No he did not
And the gap is still rather wide

An amazing defensive SS (even if one ignores the glitter of gold gloves he is still amazing)
But it cannot bridge the gulf between how many runs he failed to produce when up against the likes of Liao Jr or Kreit

And the standard for middle infielders is better than it used to be
Not only must they be solid on defense they are also now expected to contribute on offense

I am not going to say Ward is a black hole at the plate
He is not by any means

But his denfence does not earn back the runs he did not produce at the plate
That is the long and the short of it for me

I can see how someone would elect him if they placed a large emphasis on defense
He is not a very good HOF in my opinion but he in no way will tarnish the HOF like some of the others who have been elected

He is also hurt by the era he comes into

You have Whitt and Liao Jr and Kreit which are the elite of the MI for the era

Then you have Joyce and Williams who are just on the outside for me (I might toss in a vote for Joyce when some space on my ballot opens up)

Then a tier below that is Ward

If I am not going to vote for Williams and Joyce then there is no way in hell I am going to vote for Ward

Williams was 80% of the defense of Ward AND had a much better bat

And those 20% on defense do not really count for that many runs


So the gold gloves are impressive
But do not mean that much to me and I think many voters are blinded by the shine of all that gold and did not stop to think of the numbers behind everything or the era that he played in

But I am not really looking to trash the man
As I said before, if he is elected he will in no way tarnish the HOF

More just pointing out why I voted for him and explaining my suprise over his support

Since this is a computer game it's kind of tough. We obviously couldn't "SEE" any of them play. The "reputations" players have are part of the story told by the participants. What stats do you want to see? There are defensive stats in CATO. He's all over the career leaderboards. He's easy to find on the individual seasonal category lists.

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally Posted by tward13

Since this is a computer game it's kind of tough. We obviously couldn't "SEE" any of them play. The "reputations" players have are part of the story told by the participants. What stats do you want to see? There are defensive stats in CATO. He's all over the career leaderboards. He's easy to find on the individual seasonal category lists.

Any of the more advanced metrics along the lines of UZR

DWS in cato is messed up and does not compute correctly or does not represent defensive value

I do not know if it is possible from the stats avaliable to calculate how many runs over replacement level Ward saved with his glove

That would be a extremly worthwhile project and once that I would be incredibly interested in seeing the results of

Also comparing Ward who was the best glove SS of his ers vs someone like Williams who was just a notch below him would be interesting in terms of total runs prevented

Beyond TWB these are issues baseball struggles with
For all the saber advances of the last decade and the explosion of computing power in coming up with new methods to evaluaute players, defense is still largely a unexplored frontier in terms of coming up for a formula for determining just how good or bad a player is at defense