34-64-94 MLB Draft : CHAT

[Nosferatu]

I'm gonna post Johnny's pick here in a couple

 

[UK Cowboy]

So what's your reply to my four comments then?

There's nothing to explain, your an egghead kid who likes to use spin stats that are meaningless in the big picture to try and draw the conclusion that old time players stats should somehow be discounted. It's a stupid argument, and I can't teach stupid

 

[ehb5]

As a nuetral observer here I think you all know some shit about the sport. I think you all also don't handle people disagreeing with you very well (I think I'm probably that way too, no judgment I still like you all lol). But point being I appreciate this debate and the constant personal attacks take away from it (goes for all parties). I don't think anybody has the right to claim the moral high ground but I think you could all share smart well thought out opinions on the sport. Just my as an outside party lol.

 

[UK Cowboy]

As a nuetral observer here I think you all know some shit about the sport. I think you all also don't handle people disagreeing with you very well (I think I'm probably that way too, no judgment I still like you all lol). But point being I appreciate this debate and the constant personal attacks take away from it (goes for all parties). I don't think anybody has the right to claim the moral high ground but I think you could all share smart well thought out opinions on the sport. Just my as an outside party lol.

When did this dialogue start and what is the common denominator

 

[ehb5]

When did this dialogue start and what is the common denominator

Frankly I have no idea which is why I was hesitant to say anything but at the same time, I've been on these mock draft forums for a while and we get hostile/rude very quickly imo. Not a big deal but just pointing out we shouldn't act all self righteous.

 

[broncosmitty]

I'm gonna post Johnny's pick here in a couple

Not sure if you're using new math, but a couple came and went awhile ago.

 

[Omar 382]

There's nothing to explain, your an egghead kid who likes to use spin stats that are meaningless in the big picture to try and draw the conclusion that old time players stats should somehow be discounted. It's a stupid argument, and I can't teach stupid

So no reply.

 

[Nosferatu]

1. Batting average is a very insignificant and rather unimportant statistic when looked at by itself.
2. .378 was his batting average for one season, not his career.
3. League context certainly does matter. While there are many theories as to why hitters dominated the '20s (livelier ball, outlawing of spitballs, smaller fences, increased focus on hitting, smaller strike zone, and many more), one thing is clear- they dominated the '20s. So hitting .378 then is not the same as hitting .378 today.
4. You act as if Manush blew Ruth out of the water. His BA was six points lower.

1. Unimportant stat huh? Let me guess, because you say so? Why look at it by itself? Why even say that? I don't think anyone looks at player A who hit .315 and player B who hits .275 and says there is no question player A is better, of course other things are factored in, every stat is unimportant when looked at by itself, another example of you throwing out bullshit to try and sound smart.

3. Are one of those theories that there were just better hitters back then? Every example you gave is complete nonsense, increased focus on hitting? So prior to the 1920's hitters didn't focus on hitting? Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker sucked and then wham it was 1920 and they were great. You do realize that when the spitball was banned the pitchers who threw it were allowed to keep throwing it. Funny you didn't mention anything about mound height.

 

[Nosferatu]

@ehb5 can go ahead and pick.

 

[Ritzarmy]

Seriously it's been 6hrs since last pick. Wow. Sorry been at away all day. I texted EHB that he is OTC.

 

[UK Cowboy]

1. Unimportant stat huh? Let me guess, because you say so? Why look at it by itself? Why even say that? I don't think anyone looks at player A who hit .315 and player B who hits .275 and says there is no question player A is better, of course other things are factored in, every stat is unimportant when looked at by itself, another example of you throwing out bullshit to try and sound smart.

3. Are one of those theories that there were just better hitters back then? Every example you gave is complete nonsense, increased focus on hitting? So prior to the 1920's hitters didn't focus on hitting? Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker sucked and then wham it was 1920 and they were great. You do realize that when the spitball was banned the pitchers who threw it were allowed to keep throwing it. Funny you didn't mention anything about mound height.

This is spot-on . It's the modern, ESPN mentality that all sports are superior now, which is absurd. Athletes are better now, but baseball is a SKILL sport. The numbers bear out that the old time players were superior(far superior without the steroids), so people who think the game was invented this century pull up stats that are opinion based spin to justify their thinking.
The hysterical part is, how butthurt kids today get when you put the shoe on the other foot. When old time NBA players say Steph Curry wouldn't have been the same player back in the day(with a much more valid argument, the hand check rules on defense), they go absolutely insane

 

[Ritzarmy]

1. Unimportant stat huh? Let me guess, because you say so? Why look at it by itself? Why even say that? I don't think anyone looks at player A who hit .315 and player B who hits .275 and says there is no question player A is better, of course other things are factored in, every stat is unimportant when looked at by itself, another example of you throwing out bullshit to try and sound smart.

3. Are one of those theories that there were just better hitters back then? Every example you gave is complete nonsense, increased focus on hitting? So prior to the 1920's hitters didn't focus on hitting? Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker sucked and then wham it was 1920 and they were great. You do realize that when the spitball was banned the pitchers who threw it were allowed to keep throwing it. Funny you didn't mention anything about mound height.

I look at Player A and say he is better then Player B because A comes before B and in school it's better to have a A then a B.

 

[Nosferatu]

@Mebert is OTC

 

[Omar 382]

1. Unimportant stat huh? Let me guess, because you say so? Why look at it by itself? Why even say that? I don't think anyone looks at player A who hit .315 and player B who hits .275 and says there is no question player A is better, of course other things are factored in, every stat is unimportant when looked at by itself, another example of you throwing out bullshit to try and sound smart.

3. Are one of those theories that there were just better hitters back then? Every example you gave is complete nonsense, increased focus on hitting? So prior to the 1920's hitters didn't focus on hitting? Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker sucked and then wham it was 1920 and they were great. You do realize that when the spitball was banned the pitchers who threw it were allowed to keep throwing it. Funny you didn't mention anything about mound height.

1. Many people look solely at batting average to determine success. UK himself said

.379 wouldn't matter if the league leader was .450. When .379 beat guys named Ruth, Gehrig, Speaker and Collins, when it is the highest average on the planet that year, it deserves full respect. If you can't see that your dumber tga

Yep, Stoke trades Stargell to UK for Joe Medwick

So is he claiming Manush was a better hitter in 1926 than Ruth and Gehrig? I can't say since he only claims he deserves "respect" (which everyone has given him) but it certainly seems like that's what he's insinuating.

3. Yeah, there was definitely an increased focus on hitting, and if you don't know that then you don't know the culture of baseball from the 1870's up through the 1920's. From 1876-1919 the mean value of runs scored per season is 9395 runs a year. The median (which is obviously less affected by outliers and extreme values) is 9538 runs. The mean runs scored per season from 1920-1929 is 11,847 runs per season. The median is 11,805. Now I know you're going to say that this is skewed by less games being played in the first era. So let's look at OPS, which is not at all adjusted for league played and is not a counting stat. The average OPS from 1876-1919 was .658. The median OPS was .644. The average OPS from 1920-1929 was .743. The median OPS was .742. So why the increase in hitting? Because Babe Ruth hit 29 home runs in 1919, and many hitters changed their hitting approach to an upper-cut that would produce more fly balls and home runs. This is well-documented. So there certainly was a change in hitting approach. Agreed?

As far as the spitball, sure it was grandfathered, but as the years went on, less and less pitchers were allowed to throw it. In fact, only 17 pitchers were allowed to throw it after it was banned, and after 1925 only 9 pitchers remained were allowed to throw it. So its use went significantly down. Agreed?

Also, "etc." would cover mound height. Agreed?

 

[UK Cowboy]

1. Many people look solely at batting average to determine success. UK himself said


So is he claiming Manush was a better hitter in 1926 than Ruth and Gehrig? I can't say since he only claims he deserves "respect" (which everyone has given him) but it certainly seems like that's what he's insinuating.

3. Yeah, there was definitely an increased focus on hitting, and if you don't know that then you don't know the culture of baseball from the 1870's up through the 1920's. From 1876-1919 the mean value of runs scored per season is 9395 runs a year. The median (which is obviously less affected by outliers and extreme values) is 9538 runs. The mean runs scored per season from 1920-1929 is 11,847 runs per season. The median is 11,805. Now I know you're going to say that this is skewed by less games being played in the first era. So let's look at OPS, which is not at all adjusted for league played and is not a counting stat. The average OPS from 1876-1919 was .658. The median OPS was .644. The average OPS from 1920-1929 was .743. The median OPS was .742. So why the increase in hitting? Because Babe Ruth hit 29 home runs in 1919, and many hitters changed their hitting approach to an upper-cut that would produce more fly balls and home runs. This is well-documented. So there certainly was a change in hitting approach. Agreed?

As far as the spitball, sure it was grandfathered, but as the years went on, less and less pitchers were allowed to throw it. In fact, only 17 pitchers were allowed to throw it after it was banned, and after 1925 only 9 pitchers remained were allowed to throw it. So its use went significantly down. Agreed?

Also, "etc." would cover mound height. Agreed?

I never said he was better than Ruth. Show me where I did....more of your self serving, babbling spin. Milk comes out and discredits a .330 career average....you back that argument....and I point out that Manush was statistically superior in certain major stats in 1926 than several of the greatest hitters in the history of the game....there can be no debate of that...and yet you continue to spin. It's what it is

 

[Omar 382]

I never said he was better than Ruth. Show me where I did....more of your self serving, babbling spin. Milk comes out and discredits a .330 career average....you back that argument....and I point out that Manush was statistically superior in certain major stats in 1926 than several of the greatest hitters in the history of the game....there can be no debate of that...and yet you continue to spin. It's what it is

I clearly said that you never directly said that Manush was better than those players in 1926, only that that was the insinuation. So what's your point? Was Manush the best hitter in baseball in 1926?

 

[Ritzarmy]

Smittys pick of Camp does not count because he is online and didn't select camp plus campy was top of my list once I selected in 63 more picks. Damn you Smitty.

 

[UK Cowboy]

I clearly said that you never directly said that Manush was better than those players in 1926, only that that was the insinuation. So what's your point? Was Manush the best hitter in baseball in 1926?

Babe was...but you could make a very strong case that he had the 2nd best year, over Gehrig, Speaker, and Collins. Enough said

 

[Ritzarmy]

I clearly said that you never directly said that Manush was better than those players in 1926, only that that was the insinuation. So what's your point? Was Manush the best hitter in baseball in 1926?

1. Many people look solely at batting average to determine success. UK himself said


So is he claiming Manush was a better hitter in 1926 than Ruth and Gehrig? I can't say since he only claims he deserves "respect" (which everyone has given him) but it certainly seems like that's what he's insinuating.

3. Yeah, there was definitely an increased focus on hitting, and if you don't know that then you don't know the culture of baseball from the 1870's up through the 1920's. From 1876-1919 the mean value of runs scored per season is 9395 runs a year. The median (which is obviously less affected by outliers and extreme values) is 9538 runs. The mean runs scored per season from 1920-1929 is 11,847 runs per season. The median is 11,805. Now I know you're going to say that this is skewed by less games being played in the first era. So let's look at OPS, which is not at all adjusted for league played and is not a counting stat. The average OPS from 1876-1919 was .658. The median OPS was .644. The average OPS from 1920-1929 was .743. The median OPS was .742. So why the increase in hitting? Because Babe Ruth hit 29 home runs in 1919, and many hitters changed their hitting approach to an upper-cut that would produce more fly balls and home runs. This is well-documented. So there certainly was a change in hitting approach. Agreed?

As far as the spitball, sure it was grandfathered, but as the years went on, less and less pitchers were allowed to throw it. In fact, only 17 pitchers were allowed to throw it after it was banned, and after 1925 only 9 pitchers remained were allowed to throw it. So its use went significantly down. Agreed?

Also, "etc." would cover mound height. Agreed?

This video are the views/statements of everyone on the mock draft board when reading your posts Omar.

 

[Ritzarmy]

Babe was...but you could make a very strong case that he had the 2nd best year, over Gehrig, Speaker, and Collins. Enough said

I like how you said enough said like you dropped the mic and expected omar to not pick it up which all know he will. Lets just unplug the mic.