Tony Gwynn or Wade Boggs- who was better

[soxfan1468927]

its the same 1 to 1 comparison... if you have the better 2B, you have the advantage, but if I have the better #4 hitter then I have the advantage... But one player is never only one thing...

I have never said, I wouldn't want the better player at the SAME position... we have always been talking about talking about players of 2 different positions...

My point is that I don't care much about the defensive value difference between positions(except for catcher, I always want a good defensive catcher)... the debate is very complex though, because the better player generally means that the player is better offensively... Just for argument sake lets assume there is no big difference between the 2 players at the same position defensively... ONLY offensively...

so, your 2B has the higher WAR7 than my 1B... But my 1B has the better OPS...
My 2B is a weak hitter and hits in the bottom of the lineup...

Are we assuming that you now, have no weak hitters??

Lets just say it this way, if we are starting a team, I will always choose better offensive players first... then worry about balancing my team with good defense afterwards...(OUTSIDE OF PITCHING)

1. But it's not the same 1 to 1 comparison because a lineup is dependent on the team around you. It's not like Miguel Cabrera is playing 1st base because the premium defensive positions are filled. He's playing 1st base because that's the only thing he's capable of doing. That and DH obviously.

2. I know you didn't say that. I never implied you did.

3. Generally. But when we are comparing top players I wouldn't say it's the case. Altuve/Judge is a good example this year.

4. I've read your scenario multiple times and I have no idea what you are trying to say. First you said we would assume there's no big difference between 2 players at the same position defensively, then you compare a 2B to a 1B. And you say the 2nd baseman is a weak hitter, and hits at the bottom of the lineup, but then you say he has a higher WAR7. So either a) he's "weak" but still WAY better than every 2nd baseman in the league, or b)he's tremendous defensively. But you said they were the same defensively so I'm confused.

5. So let's say you are starting a team from scratch. You have a 2nd baseman with a .900 OPS, and the rest of the 2nd basemen all hit .750. Then you have a 1st baseman with a .950 OPS and the rest of the 1st basemen all hit .900. You would take the 1st baseman with a .950 OPS and a 2nd baseman with a .750 OPS over the .900 OPS 2nd baseman and a .900 OPS 1st baseman?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

1. But it's not the same 1 to 1 comparison because a lineup is dependent on the team around you. It's not like Miguel Cabrera is playing 1st base because the premium defensive positions are filled. He's playing 1st base because that's the only thing he's capable of doing. That and DH obviously.

2. I know you didn't say that. I never implied you did.

3. Generally. But when we are comparing top players I wouldn't say it's the case. Altuve/Judge is a good example this year.

4. I've read your scenario multiple times and I have no idea what you are trying to say. First you said we would assume there's no big difference between 2 players at the same position defensively, then you compare a 2B to a 1B. And you say the 2nd baseman is a weak hitter, and hits at the bottom of the lineup, but then you say he has a higher WAR7. So either a) he's "weak" but still WAY better than every 2nd baseman in the league, or b)he's tremendous defensively. But you said they were the same defensively so I'm confused.

5. So let's say you are starting a team from scratch. You have a 2nd baseman with a .900 OPS, and the rest of the 2nd basemen all hit .750. Then you have a 1st baseman with a .950 OPS and the rest of the 1st basemen all hit .900. You would take the 1st baseman with a .950 OPS and a 2nd baseman with a .750 OPS over the .900 OPS 2nd baseman and a .900 OPS 1st baseman?

3. I think altuve had the better offensive season than judge... but as always it is really hard to compare different type of hitters... that's really why I like to group them by where they should bat in an IDEAL lineup(this is also where you are getting confused by my arguments-, I am using an ideal lineup... where 2 .300+ hitters who hit for power should always be hitting third...

4. this was unclear because we were not just comparing a 2B to a 2B, we were comparing a 2B to a 1B, but to do that don't you need to know you are not going to get a defensive liability at 2B later on when you get that player... in fact chances are you will get a good defensive player the later you wait, players from weaker positions are generally not going to make the league if they are bad offensively AND bad defensively... If you wait to get a bad offensively, then you should be getting a strong defender... just by logic...

5. there is of course exceptions to every rule... and nothing is black and white... BUT if you want to know black and white, yes, I would take the 1B .950 over the 2 players... I care more about my 1-5 hitters than the positions they play...

 

[tducey]

Tony Gwynn

 

[soxfan1468927]

3. I think altuve had the better offensive season than judge... but as always it is really hard to compare different type of hitters... that's really why I like to group them by where they should bat in an IDEAL lineup(this is also where you are getting confused by my arguments-, I am using an ideal lineup... where 2 .300+ hitters who hit for power should always be hitting third...

4. this was unclear because we were not just comparing a 2B to a 2B, we were comparing a 2B to a 1B, but to do that don't you need to know you are not going to get a defensive liability at 2B later on when you get that player... in fact chances are you will get a good defensive player the later you wait, players from weaker positions are generally not going to make the league if they are bad offensively AND bad defensively... If you wait to get a bad offensively, then you should be getting a strong defender... just by logic...

5. there is of course exceptions to every rule... and nothing is black and white... BUT if you want to know black and white, yes, I would take the 1B .950 over the 2 players... I care more about my 1-5 hitters than the positions they play...

1. Yes but ideal lineups don't exist. So comparing players who bat 4th in reality while talking about an ideal lineup is a fool's errand.

2. Right, we aren't comparing 2B to a 2B. You brought up 2 players at the same position, which is what confused me. The rest of your sentence, I don't understand what you are trying to say.

3. I care about scoring runs, and having 2 players with a .900 OPS is going to produce more runs than having 1 player with a .950 and 1 with a .750.

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

Voters would never give the MVP to a Yankee, just the way it is

 

[MilkSpiller22]

1. Yes but ideal lineups don't exist. So comparing players who bat 4th in reality while talking about an ideal lineup is a fool's errand.

2. Right, we aren't comparing 2B to a 2B. You brought up 2 players at the same position, which is what confused me. The rest of your sentence, I don't understand what you are trying to say.

3. I care about scoring runs, and having 2 players with a .900 OPS is going to produce more runs than having 1 player with a .950 and 1 with a .750.

I feel like the disjoint is that you just see it as a 2 for 2...
what I mean by that is if we are comparing a first baseman with a 2nd baseman, then we have to include the other 2nd baseman and first baseman to see the full picture... My point is that this is not true at all..

Look at it this way... if we found 30 hooplans to draft a starting lineup/defense(no pitching) of active players...

For argument sake( even though I do think Altuve is the clear MVP and had the best season) lets just say Judge had the better offensive season...

If I picked judge with my first pick, and you picked altuve. My 2nd round pick doesn't have to be a 2B, nor does your second pick have to be a RF.. so it really is foolish to compare them like that... sure, your 2B/RF combination might be better than mine, but my 2B might be my last pick...

Which really complicates comparing players of different positions even more... which is why I really ignore the defensive positional value comparing 2 players of different positions...

I don't ignore it totally... I more or less consider it a tie breaker, for the close battles...

 

[Wazmankg]

I'll take Gwynn if only because anywhere but Fenway it isn't particularly close.

 

[DragonfromTO]

You would have been better off comparing Gwynn to Ichiro. Both are power-limited, lefty-hitting, right fielders.

Coming up with a natural comparison to Boggs much more difficult. Looking down the HOF list, the best comparisons I could see were Pie Traynor or Home Run Baker. Offensively, Boggs was not your proto-typical third baseman.

Traynor walked half as much as Boggs and never finished higher than 5th in the NL in BA and Baker led the league in HRs 4 times. They both look more similar to Boggs than they actually were because of the eras they played in, the league BA for Traynor's career was .294 and Baker of course played in the dead ball era.

That being said I'm not sure that there's a better choice anyway. Brett maybe? He had a little more HR power and fewer walks but the rest is pretty close and he won 3 batting titles.

 

[DragonfromTO]

so, your 2B has the higher WAR7 than my 1B... But my 1B has the better OPS...
My 2B is a weak hitter and hits in the bottom of the lineup...

Are we assuming that you now, have no weak hitters??

Lets just say it this way, if we are starting a team, I will always choose better offensive players first... then worry about balancing my team with good defense afterwards...(OUTSIDE OF PITCHING)

My 1B is a decent hitter (because it's easier to find that in a 1B than it is in a 2B) and bats in the same spot in my lineup as your weak hitting 2B does in yours. Don't I now have the advantage in the aggregate?

 

[DragonfromTO]

If I picked judge with my first pick, and you picked altuve. My 2nd round pick doesn't have to be a 2B, nor does your second pick have to be a RF.. so it really is foolish to compare them like that... sure, your 2B/RF combination might be better than mine, but my 2B might be my last pick...

No, you wouldn't have to take those 2 positions first but the end of 9 rounds you would need to have taken one guy at each position, no? It's fundamentally the same argument.

 

[soxfan1468927]

I feel like the disjoint is that you just see it as a 2 for 2...
what I mean by that is if we are comparing a first baseman with a 2nd baseman, then we have to include the other 2nd baseman and first baseman to see the full picture... My point is that this is not true at all..

Look at it this way... if we found 30 hooplans to draft a starting lineup/defense(no pitching) of active players...

For argument sake( even though I do think Altuve is the clear MVP and had the best season) lets just say Judge had the better offensive season...

If I picked judge with my first pick, and you picked altuve. My 2nd round pick doesn't have to be a 2B, nor does your second pick have to be a RF.. so it really is foolish to compare them like that... sure, your 2B/RF combination might be better than mine, but my 2B might be my last pick...

Which really complicates comparing players of different positions even more... which is why I really ignore the defensive positional value comparing 2 players of different positions...

I don't ignore it totally... I more or less consider it a tie breaker, for the close battles...

I don't think you really got what I was saying, which is my fault. Pretty much what Dragon said. I never said you have to use your 2nd round pick on a 2nd baseman, but you would have to choose one eventually. You have to look at your full lineup to see the full picture. Your first baseman may be better offensively than mine, but the gap in offense won't be as big as my 2nd baseman to yours.

I think it can cause a huge gap in value and therefore I don't just use it as a tiebreaker. I think it's silly to just use something as a tiebreaker anyway. We should look at the whole thing no matter what.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

My 1B is a decent hitter (because it's easier to find that in a 1B than it is in a 2B) and bats in the same spot in my lineup as your weak hitting 2B does in yours. Don't I now have the advantage in the aggregate?

I guess this experiment depends on if we have a DH or not... in no way if we had a DH would your last pick be able to be a 1B... again, there is exceptions to all rules...

 

[soxfan1468927]

I guess this experiment depends on if we have a DH or not... in no way if we had a DH would your last pick be able to be a 1B... again, there is exceptions to all rules...

Why not?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Why not?

if the batter is bad, sure... but your not going to get a good bat in the last round... point is, if I am drafting a 2B in the last round, and you are drafting a 1B in the last round, the difference between the 2 hitters are not going to be much(assuming DH, or at least like real MLB where half the teams have a DH...

 

[soxfan1468927]

if the batter is bad, sure... but your not going to get a good bat in the last round... point is, if I am drafting a 2B in the last round, and you are drafting a 1B in the last round, the difference between the 2 hitters are not going to be much(assuming DH)

That is completely false. The worst OPS among qualified 1st basemen this year was .721, the worst OPS among 2nd basemen was .622. That's a 14% drop. Or the difference between Aaron Judge this year and Marwin Gonzalez

 

[DragonfromTO]

I guess this experiment depends on if we have a DH or not... in no way if we had a DH would your last pick be able to be a 1B... again, there is exceptions to all rules...

I don't really see how this response addresses the point/question I made/asked.

 

[Mebert]

True stat: 104% of Boggs doubles come off of looping fly balls that bounce off the green monster.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I don't really see how this response addresses the point/question I made/asked.

fine, if your first baseman is hitting in the same spot as my second baseman, and both are bottom of the lineup guys... then sure your 1B is likely better...

Me bringing up DH though is important though... Without DH, then every position can just be ranked 1-30 and then you can see which positions stay constant at a point... for example, if there is not much difference between the 10th and 30th 1B, you will not draft that position until later knowing you can get a decent player(once you lose out on the early ones)... But with DH, you know the better offensive players will be taken earlier, despite position... so each position pool is larger... it makes the difference between the bottom players smaller or at least less of a factor... If a first baseman is picked in the last round, the chances are he is not a good hitter, sure he might be better than the 2B or SS drafted around the same time, but generally how much affect does a teams worst hitters make??

and I said from the beginning of this argument that I am having trouble express it, because I see it to be a complex argument...


to simplify my point,

a teams 1-5 hitters are responsible for over 70% of a teams total offense
to maximize your 1-5 hitters is making your offense better.

taking a player at a weaker position to be one of your best hitters wont make your offense better if it makes your 1-5 worse...

sure, it may make your 6-9 better, but would you rather have better BEST players or better WORST players?? I know I would rather have better BEST... they are the ones you count on, they are the ones that scare pitchers...

Bringing up defense is irrelevant, because chances are if you wait on a weaker position, that player will be a plus defender, as it is hard to make the MLB if you are both bad offensively and bad defensively...

 

[soxfan1468927]

fine, if your first baseman is hitting in the same spot as my second baseman, and both are bottom of the lineup guys... then sure your 1B is likely better...

Me bringing up DH though is important though... Without DH, then every position can just be ranked 1-30 and then you can see which positions stay constant at a point... for example, if there is not much difference between the 10th and 30th 1B, you will not draft that position until later knowing you can get a decent player(once you lose out on the early ones)... But with DH, you know the better offensive players will be taken earlier, despite position... so each position pool is larger... it makes the difference between the bottom players smaller or at least less of a factor... If a first baseman is picked in the last round, the chances are he is not a good hitter, sure he might be better than the 2B or SS drafted around the same time, but generally how much affect does a teams worst hitters make??

and I said from the beginning of this argument that I am having trouble express it, because I see it to be a complex argument...


to simplify my point,

a teams 1-5 hitters are responsible for over 70% of a teams total offense
to maximize your 1-5 hitters is making your offense better.

taking a player at a weaker position to be one of your best hitters wont make your offense better if it makes your 1-5 worse...

sure, it may make your 6-9 better, but would you rather have better BEST players or better WORST players?? I know I would rather have better BEST... they are the ones you count on, they are the ones that scare pitchers...

Bringing up defense is irrelevant, because chances are if you wait on a weaker position, that player will be a plus defender, as it is hard to make the MLB if you are both bad offensively and bad defensively...

Where are you getting that from though? In all of baseball, 62.9% of runs + RBI came from the 1-5 spots. And the best offense in baseball, the Astros, saw just 61.3% of their runs+RBI come from the 1-5 spots.

 

[DragonfromTO]

fine, if your first baseman is hitting in the same spot as my second baseman, and both are bottom of the lineup guys... then sure your 1B is likely better...

Me bringing up DH though is important though... Without DH, then every position can just be ranked 1-30 and then you can see which positions stay constant at a point... for example, if there is not much difference between the 10th and 30th 1B, you will not draft that position until later knowing you can get a decent player(once you lose out on the early ones)... But with DH, you know the better offensive players will be taken earlier, despite position... so each position pool is larger... it makes the difference between the bottom players smaller or at least less of a factor... If a first baseman is picked in the last round, the chances are he is not a good hitter, sure he might be better than the 2B or SS drafted around the same time, but generally how much affect does a teams worst hitters make??

and I said from the beginning of this argument that I am having trouble express it, because I see it to be a complex argument...


to simplify my point,

a teams 1-5 hitters are responsible for over 70% of a teams total offense
to maximize your 1-5 hitters is making your offense better.

taking a player at a weaker position to be one of your best hitters wont make your offense better if it makes your 1-5 worse...

sure, it may make your 6-9 better, but would you rather have better BEST players or better WORST players?? I know I would rather have better BEST... they are the ones you count on, they are the ones that scare pitchers...

Bringing up defense is irrelevant, because chances are if you wait on a weaker position, that player will be a plus defender, as it is hard to make the MLB if you are both bad offensively and bad defensively...

In a sport like this I'm not sure that either of those answers is correct. I'd probably rather have the best 9.