1977 MLB Draft CHAMPIONSHIP

[Nosferatu]

I dont think looking at it like that works either, what are the breakdowns of Tiant vs E and Seaver vs J, maybe 1 player had Seaver's number and he destroyed everyone else.

 

[steveringo]

Thats the thing, we have always played it like who would win a 7 game series with these guys at the top of their games. Using the numbers is a nice tool, but it's not the way I would go. If that's it, we all would just pull up everyones WAR and pick from that list. Problem is, if you look at the last 10 World Series Champs, I would bet there are no more than half the teams that won that had the best overall Saber numbers. For my own squad, in a 7 game series, I dont care what the Saber numbers say, if I'm trotting out an at their peak Carlton, Palmer and Morris twice and Richard once, they aren't losing 4 out of 7. Not a chance

This was my first attempt in these mock drafts and I just assumed everyone had a stat mind...

In any series, I agree your team would certianly have won. "Statistically" speaking, good pitching beats good hitting - and you have the good pitching.

I would still love to drop these teams into a sim league app. I just don't have the time...

 

[jeffro151]

I dont care what the Saber numbers say, if I'm trotting out an at their peak Carlton, Palmer and Morris twice and Richard once, they aren't losing 4 out of 7. Not a chance

I get where you are coming from, but would you have predicted that the last 3 AL Cy Young winners would have been swept in a best of 5 series?

 

[UK Cowboy]

This was my first attempt in these mock drafts and I just assumed everyone had a stat mind...

In any series, I agree your team would certianly have won. "Statistically" speaking, good pitching beats good hitting - and you have the good pitching.

I would still love to drop these teams into a sim league app. I just don't have the time...

That would be awesome. Instead of constantly asking for more people to vote, we just drop it into a SIM and thats it. I bet more people would play as well

 

[da55bums]

Thats the thing, we have always played it like who would win a 7 game series with these guys at the top of their games. Using the numbers is a nice tool, but it's not the way I would go. If that's it, we all would just pull up everyones WAR and pick from that list. Problem is, if you look at the last 10 World Series Champs, I would bet there are no more than half the teams that won that had the best overall Saber numbers. For my own squad, in a 7 game series, I dont care what the Saber numbers say, if I'm trotting out an at their peak Carlton, Palmer and Morris twice and Richard once, they aren't losing 4 out of 7. Not a chance

(your nuts for not going with Richard twice over Morris, its not even close)

The Dodgers, A's, Tigers have been the best pitching teams over the last few seasons but none of them have won a WS...a team doesn't win it all with just great SP's, ask Kershaw, King Felix, Yu Darvish, JV, Max, Price....think there is a complete over emphasis on "just vote based on best starting pitchers" if so, UK should have easily won this.

 

[UK Cowboy]

I get where you are coming from, but would you have predicted that the last 3 AL Cy Young winners would have been swept in a best of 5 series?

It's all subjective no doubt. As to that, I would say Verlander certainly wasn't "Peak" this year, and Verlander and Price have never been great post season guys. If you are talking about over a season, you would see them different. In the last 20 years, guys like Randy Johnson, Roger Clemens, Curt Schilling and Andy Pettitte would have more value if you were talking about a 7 game series and guys like Price, Greg Maddox and Tom Glavine would have less

 

[blstoker]

I dont think looking at it like that works either, what are the breakdowns of Tiant vs E and Seaver vs J, maybe 1 player had Seaver's number and he destroyed everyone else.

As explained earlier, Team J's #3-#7 hitters all had at least 18 ABs versus Seaver and all hit .280 or higher. Here's their breakdown:

Brett - .389/.500/.556/1.056
Foster - .308/.308/.500/.808
Clark - .293/.392/.463/.856
Torre - .280/.302/.410/.712
Carty - .368/.442/.553/.994

That's some solid success coming from the middle of the order. Now, Wilson (.190), Carew (.182) and Bowa (.212) didn't enjoy that success and Scott never faced Seaver.

On the other side, Tiant only really had Whitaker who had that kind of success"

Trammell - .083/.083/.083/.167
Whitaker - .333/.368/.444/.813
Bonds - .222/.250/.444/.694
Perez - .067/.067/.067/.133
Hernandez - .667/.667/.667/1.333 (3 at bats)
Allen - .174/.174/.304/.478
Rudi - .278/.310/.352/.662
Fosse - .158/.158/.158/.316
Maddox - Never faced

Again, not saying that Tiant was better overall, just that he did better against the batters he will be facing.

 

[Nosferatu]

Again somewhat misleading.

George Brett's AB's against Seaver would have come at the end of Seavers career being he played in the NL until he was 39.

 

[blstoker]

Again somewhat misleading.

George Brett's AB's against Seaver would have come at the end of Seavers career being he played in the NL until he was 39.

Correct, but it's the best I can do. In the original post, I did state that batter faced numbers were for careers not for peak on peak. People can use them if they want, or not. I posted a lot of stats, and people can use them or not. In the end, everyone will choose who they think was best, whether its name recognition, statistics, or who has the most players from certain teams, I just try to put out the stats and then explain how I came to the conclusion I did. In the end, the pitcher vs. batter stats were used by me as much because I couldn't really decide who was better and it was a tie breaker, not as a sole determining factor.

 

[Nosferatu]

Oh and im not trying to be an ahole either, I just think numbers in these dont tell the entire story and sorry if thats already been mentioned...

 

[Ritzarmy]

Oh and im not trying to be an ahole either, I just think numbers in these dont tell the entire story and sorry if thats already been mentioned...

Well numbers say that 88% of posters disagree with everything you post.

 

[blstoker]

Oh and im not trying to be an ahole either, I just think numbers in these dont tell the entire story and sorry if thats already been mentioned...

No its fine, I went back and looked, and the disclaimer was there (so I messed up, happens way too often). The only reason I'm even discussing these stats is that they were the ones that got pointed out at first. Otherwise I'd just discuss the grand totals, if anything at all.

Don't worry, I don't think you're an a-hole, at least no more of one than I am...though that may not be much a comfort come to think of it.

 

[DragonfromTO]

Check em out - Team J's batters had significantly more success against Seaver than Team E's batter had against Tiant. Team J's 3-7 batters all hit for .280 or higher in their careers against Seaver, where only Whitaker on Team E had more than 3 ABs and achieved at least the same average (.333).

No, Tiant was not a better pitcher than Seaver, but there's more to this isn't Tiant vs. Seaver, it's Tiant against Team E vs. Seaver against Team J. That's the comparison I used to come up with that conclusion.

When they faced them matters though. For instance guys like Brett and Wilson that were younger AL guys would have only faced Seaver in the mid-80s when he was at his worst and they were at their best.

 

[DragonfromTO]

As explained earlier, Team J's #3-#7 hitters all had at least 18 ABs versus Seaver and all hit .280 or higher. Here's their breakdown:

Brett - .389/.500/.556/1.056
Foster - .308/.308/.500/.808
Clark - .293/.392/.463/.856
Torre - .280/.302/.410/.712
Carty - .368/.442/.553/.994

That's some solid success coming from the middle of the order. Now, Wilson (.190), Carew (.182) and Bowa (.212) didn't enjoy that success and Scott never faced Seaver.

On the other side, Tiant only really had Whitaker who had that kind of success"

Trammell - .083/.083/.083/.167
Whitaker - .333/.368/.444/.813
Bonds - .222/.250/.444/.694
Perez - .067/.067/.067/.133
Hernandez - .667/.667/.667/1.333 (3 at bats)
Allen - .174/.174/.304/.478
Rudi - .278/.310/.352/.662
Fosse - .158/.158/.158/.316
Maddox - Never faced

Again, not saying that Tiant was better overall, just that he did better against the batters he will be facing.

Here's another example of what I was talking about... as far as I can figure, being mostly an NL guy Perez would have only faced Tiant in 1980, when he was 38 and Looie was 39. I'm not sure that's a good gauge of how they would have done against each other in their primes.

 

[broncosmitty]

I also don't think The Bird has a large enough sample size. 21 ABs against total.

I liked when we talked this stuff out. Lefty/Righty matchups.....Make up of the rotation.... Situational substitutions.....guys having a roll...... Chemistry.... Conversation.....

I didn't even vote for Team E in the semis, so I don't mind losing, just think the meat of the mock isn't cold numbers.

 

[blstoker]

Here's another example of what I was talking about... as far as I can figure, being mostly an NL guy Perez would have only faced Tiant in 1980, when he was 38 and Looie was 39. I'm not sure that's a good gauge of how they would have done against each other in their primes.

Actually, the numbers are both post season and regular season. They faced each other in the WS in 1975, Perez went 1-12 against Tiant in Tiant's 3 starts.

 

[skinz2winz]

I'm sorry but I have to go with Team E as the better team since that is what the pole ask for. I prefer the solid defense up the middle myself and a solid rotation.

 

[Ritzarmy]

Thanks for voting. Skinz you interested in doing a NFL mock draft?

 

[Nosferatu]

Well numbers say that 88% of posters disagree with everything you post.

12% woo hoo!

 

[blstoker]

Tied 4-4 nearly 36 hours into it.