.330/3000 hits: automatic induction? - Page 2

eborix · 05-19-2005, 07:05 PM

In my opinion, 3000+ hits is an automatic HoF induction.

Rasmuth · 05-19-2005, 07:18 PM

I don't buy the position argument either...a player is what he is...he was a 1b who didn't live up to the normal position stereotype...that doesn't make him less valuable to a team...

...using that logic they should demote him to the minors or cut him entirely just to find somebody who fits the "role" better...say a .265/25/95 guy...

anyway...a solid GM will build a team around his cornerstones...so in this case you make sure you get power from other positions...

Crapshoot · 05-19-2005, 07:40 PM

a 110 OPS+ player at 1b is likely to be about league average for his position - this is where the concept of replacement value comes in. This is Pete rose redux- a ridiculously overrated singles hitter.

Joshv02 · 05-19-2005, 07:51 PM

What was the league context? Same as modern (RL) baseball?

If so, I agree withi Aadik -- I'm not impressed by average (or below average) over a long period of time. It is ok, it has some value, but for a 1B, he was likely not better than any replacement player and, therefore, didn't have too much value.

Elendil · 05-19-2005, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshv02

What was the league context? Same as modern (RL) baseball?

If so, I agree withi Aadik -- I'm not impressed by average (or below average) over a long period of time. It is ok, it has some value, but for a 1B, he was likely not better than any replacement player and, therefore, didn't have too much value.

The league settings are basically like 1980's MLB - ~.260 BA, ~.030 HR/AB, ~.1 BB/PA. I don't know how to calculate replacement player value acc to the formal definition, but nine qualifying 1B's have had career OPS'es higher than Vivar's, including active players (in a league that has played about 18 seasons - 27 total first basemen qualify).

Joshv02 · 05-19-2005, 08:51 PM

Thanks Elendil.

This is a set of guesses, but lets try. Assume a normal distribution of offense. So, a 1B is about 10% better than average (for example, the average 1B would have a .285 EqA from baseballprospectus). So, in your league, an average player would be at .260/.334/.430, with 16 HRs and 60 BBs in 600 PAs, or 540 ABs. (The SLG was a guess, the 260/334 work at 600 PAs; 16 HR/540 ABs = 0.03).

I'm lazy, so I'll estimate RC as obp*slg*ab. For an average player, that is .334*.43*540, 77.6 RC/540 ABs. Or, 5.24 RC/27 outs. (600-60 walks - 140 hits.)

So, our 1B will be 10% better, or at 85.4 RC/540 ABs, or 5.76 RC/27.

Your 1B is at .337/.389/.400. That is 84 RC/554 ABs, or 6.18 RC/27. So, he is slightly above average b/c he has a heavily OBP weighted line. How slight? 7%.

Is that a HoF? I think not -- its about 10-15 wins over average for his 16 year career.

Elendil · 05-19-2005, 09:01 PM

Those guesses don't seem to be too far off. The average SLG in the league is a little lower - a typical season has the league going .260/.330/.410. That will make our player look a little better than the calculations above, but still not massively better than the average 1B.

rudel.dietrich · 05-19-2005, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aadik

This is Pete rose redux- a ridiculously overrated singles hitter.

You need to be more careful with what you type.
Rose had 2.5 as many doubles as this player, over 100 more HR and 110 more 3B

I don't know what is going on with all of the Pete hating going around. The man was one of the 50 top players in baseball history.

Joshv02 · 05-19-2005, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fallschirmjager

You need to be more careful with what you type.
Rose had 2.5 as many doubles as this player, over 100 more HR and 110 more 3B

I don't know what is going on with all of the Pete hating going around. The man was one of the 50 top players in baseball history.

I could be wrong, but I think the comparison was simply that Rose was barely above average for a long time, thus he never was very good but was ok long enough to have big counting stat numbers.

Though, I agree that Rose is better than this 1B (mostly b/c of league context) and Rose played 50% longer than this 1B.

Emmaculate · 05-19-2005, 10:35 PM

In without a second thought.

rudel.dietrich · 05-19-2005, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshv02

I could be wrong, but I think the comparison was simply that Rose was barely above average for a long time, thus he never was very good but was ok long enough to have big counting stat numbers.

Though, I agree that Rose is better than this 1B (mostly b/c of league context) and Rose played 50% longer than this 1B.

Quote:

ridiculously overrated singles hitter

That is what I took issue with. Rose has more EBH than many of the greatest hitters in the HOF.
Hell, he has more EBH than Roy Campanella had hits.

He walked 70 times a year, had 200 hits like clockwork, had 40 doubles many times, had over 2100 runs scored (that is just staggering)
Won 2 GG in the OF and played good defense everywhere.
Made the AS game at 4 posistions and was on WS teams six times.

So no, he did not have the peak seasons of other players. Nor should be rate him among the top tier of the game.
But let's not use asisnine statments like

Quote:

ridiculously overrated singles hitter

Mike Ivie · 05-19-2005, 10:47 PM

No question he is a Hall of Fame player. He did something better than anyone in the league ever did and that one thing was getting on base via the slappy hit. No shame in that.

TonyJ · 05-19-2005, 11:08 PM

Looks a lot like a little bit better version of Mark Grace. Love the on base ability, but.....naw, he's not a HoF.

TonyJ · 05-19-2005, 11:09 PM

Oh yeah, and Aadik is off-base on Rose. Rose was overrated, yes, but he was a legit great player.

bulldog55 · 05-19-2005, 11:24 PM

Also, regarding the whole position thing, correct me if I'm wrong but OOTP doesn't really generate players who have appropriate offensive skills for their position. If it were coded that first basemen are generally big power hitters and shortstops are quick and scrappy that might influence me a bit more, but even then a good hitter is a good hitter.

UngratefulDead · 05-19-2005, 11:35 PM

Ehhhh... I could go either way. He's not clearly a HOFer though.

Elendil · 05-19-2005, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bulldog55

Also, regarding the whole position thing, correct me if I'm wrong but OOTP doesn't really generate players who have appropriate offensive skills for their position. If it were coded that first basemen are generally big power hitters and shortstops are quick and scrappy that might influence me a bit more, but even then a good hitter is a good hitter.

I think the idea is actually that teams won't bother expending resources on acquiring, developing, and keeping good-fielding first basemen when they can spend those resources on getting bad-fielding, good-hitting first basemen and good-fielding, bad-hitting middle infielders. Thus, on balance, first basemen will tend to be not very good defensively and above average offensively. However, I'm not sure that OOTP's AI acts as intelligently as it could here. I see plenty of AI teams overpaying for good-hitting, horrible-fielding shortstops and starting them there.

mauboy · 05-19-2005, 11:47 PM

He's in, in my books.

He had ZERO full seasons where he batted below .300. The only season he batted under .300 he only had 119 AB's. You can't really find that consistency anywhere today.

UngratefulDead · 05-19-2005, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mauboy

He's in, in my books.

He had ZERO full seasons where he batted below .300. The only season he batted under .300 he only had 119 AB's. You can't really find that consistency anywhere today.

Nobody hits .300 that regularly.

Signed,
Manny Ramirez.

TonyJ · 05-19-2005, 11:56 PM

Hitting .300 regularly is impressive, but not valuable in and of itself.

05-19-2005, 07:18 PM	#22
Rasmuth All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Upstate Western NY Posts: 1,760	I don't buy the position argument either...a player is what he is...he was a 1b who didn't live up to the normal position stereotype...that doesn't make him less valuable to a team... ...using that logic they should demote him to the minors or cut him entirely just to find somebody who fits the "role" better...say a .265/25/95 guy... anyway...a solid GM will build a team around his cornerstones...so in this case you make sure you get power from other positions... __________________ http://www.soundclick.com/bands/defa...?bandID=250426

05-19-2005, 07:40 PM	#23
Crapshoot Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: watching: DArwin's missing link in action Posts: 3,112	a 110 OPS+ player at 1b is likely to be about league average for his position - this is where the concept of replacement value comes in. This is Pete rose redux- a ridiculously overrated singles hitter. __________________ Senior Senor Member of the OOTP Boards Pittsburgh Playmates- OTBL

05-19-2005, 07:51 PM	#24
Joshv02 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: , " Posts: 3,082	What was the league context? Same as modern (RL) baseball? If so, I agree withi Aadik -- I'm not impressed by average (or below average) over a long period of time. It is ok, it has some value, but for a 1B, he was likely not better than any replacement player and, therefore, didn't have too much value. __________________ Brookline Maccabees. RIP

05-19-2005, 08:51 PM	#26
Joshv02 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: , " Posts: 3,082	Thanks Elendil. This is a set of guesses, but lets try. Assume a normal distribution of offense. So, a 1B is about 10% better than average (for example, the average 1B would have a .285 EqA from baseballprospectus). So, in your league, an average player would be at .260/.334/.430, with 16 HRs and 60 BBs in 600 PAs, or 540 ABs. (The SLG was a guess, the 260/334 work at 600 PAs; 16 HR/540 ABs = 0.03). I'm lazy, so I'll estimate RC as obpslgab. For an average player, that is .334.43540, 77.6 RC/540 ABs. Or, 5.24 RC/27 outs. (600-60 walks - 140 hits.) So, our 1B will be 10% better, or at 85.4 RC/540 ABs, or 5.76 RC/27. Your 1B is at .337/.389/.400. That is 84 RC/554 ABs, or 6.18 RC/27. So, he is slightly above average b/c he has a heavily OBP weighted line. How slight? 7%. Is that a HoF? I think not -- its about 10-15 wins over average for his 16 year career. __________________ Brookline Maccabees. RIP Last edited by Joshv02; 05-19-2005 at 09:10 PM.

05-19-2005, 09:01 PM	#27
Elendil Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: the dynasty forum Posts: 2,318	Those guesses don't seem to be too far off. The average SLG in the league is a little lower - a typical season has the league going .260/.330/.410. That will make our player look a little better than the calculations above, but still not massively better than the average 1B. __________________ Heaven is kicking back with a double Talisker and a churchwarden stuffed with latakia.

05-19-2005, 07:05 PM	#21
eborix Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Shepherdsville KY Posts: 228	In my opinion, 3000+ hits is an automatic HoF induction.

05-19-2005, 10:35 PM	#30
Emmaculate Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: BC, Canada Posts: 238	In without a second thought. __________________ APBL- Seattle Mariners OTM- Pittsburgh River Bandits HBL- Colorado Rockies www.actionpackedbaseballleague.com www.overthemound.com/blog www.hblbaseball.com/forums/

05-19-2005, 10:47 PM	#32
Mike Ivie Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 203	No question he is a Hall of Fame player. He did something better than anyone in the league ever did and that one thing was getting on base via the slappy hit. No shame in that. __________________ NBL - San Diego Padres

05-19-2005, 11:08 PM	#33
TonyJ Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Gassin' Kurds Posts: 2,019	Looks a lot like a little bit better version of Mark Grace. Love the on base ability, but.....naw, he's not a HoF. __________________ My Podcasts: Talk Democratic Dysfunction Name Two Bands with Andy and Andy

05-19-2005, 11:09 PM	#34
TonyJ Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Gassin' Kurds Posts: 2,019	Oh yeah, and Aadik is off-base on Rose. Rose was overrated, yes, but he was a legit great player. __________________ My Podcasts: Talk Democratic Dysfunction Name Two Bands with Andy and Andy

05-19-2005, 11:24 PM	#35
bulldog55 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: California's Canada Warnings: 17 Posts: 2,479	Also, regarding the whole position thing, correct me if I'm wrong but OOTP doesn't really generate players who have appropriate offensive skills for their position. If it were coded that first basemen are generally big power hitters and shortstops are quick and scrappy that might influence me a bit more, but even then a good hitter is a good hitter. __________________ Commissioner, Trans-Continental Base Ball Association Owner/GM, Los Angeles Electrics (TCBA), Beaverton Rangers (OTBL), Portland Mavericks (Union League), and Los Angeles Superbas (Century League) Being smart, don't always make you popular.

05-19-2005, 11:35 PM	#36
UngratefulDead Banned Join Date: May 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 3,415	Ehhhh... I could go either way. He's not clearly a HOFer though.

05-19-2005, 11:47 PM	#38
mauboy Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 2,906	He's in, in my books. He had ZERO full seasons where he batted below .300. The only season he batted under .300 he only had 119 AB's. You can't really find that consistency anywhere today.

05-19-2005, 11:56 PM	#40
TonyJ Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Gassin' Kurds Posts: 2,019	Hitting .300 regularly is impressive, but not valuable in and of itself. __________________ My Podcasts: Talk Democratic Dysfunction Name Two Bands with Andy and Andy