Here we go - Bonds, Clemens, Sosa on the Hall of Fame ballot

[filosofy29]

I don't have much of a problem with the theoretical foundation of WAR. But I don't like the defensive metrics currently incorporated into the calculation.

There's also the danger of dumbing down an understanding of the game by resolving a complex calculation into a single cardinal number, which I find troubling. After all, an understanding of the number system is orders of magnitude more ubiquitous than being able to look at a hitter's build and stance and having a good idea of where his holes are.

Both of these. I like WAR (even though I have an elementary understanding of it) as it is kind of a nice quick reference to see how well a player performs against the "average". I can just think of some subtle instances* where commen sense and WAR may butt heads. Like I said earlier though, I think it is a very useful metric.

*Some instances that come to mind immediately (and I'll probably get myself into trouble here as I don't have a high level of knowledge on WAR and all of it's individual parts):
DEFENSE:
- In regards to the defensive metrics, lets say an OF'er always dives for the ball no matter score, circumstance, etc. He may end up having a better "zone rating" than a smarter OF'er who knows where and when to pick his spots (so as not to allow a double). Obviously, we all know that making a diving attempt usually doesn't end up in an error when it's not caught, but it may end up costing an extra base or a run later down the road.
- Errors, sometimes a player will go out of his way to make a great play (say the score was 10-0 ) that he'd normally eat (i.e. - a squibber down the first base line with a fast runner at the plate) in order to preserve a shutout, a no-hitter, or a perfect game for a pitcher, but his throw goes into the 1st base stands.
PITCHING:
- A pitcher (I remember Jamie Moyer most recently when he was with the M's) might go more innings/outs than he should in a lopsided loss or win, when normally in a close game they'd be yanked, but they're going as long as they can to save the BP.
- A pitcher who knows a person has ownage on them, so they do an unintentional/intentional walk to the player to pitch to somebody less threatening, but their WHIP goes up.
OFFENSE:
- A guy goes for a stolen base in an unwise situation (say, down by 3 runs with nobody out in the 9th inning and only him on 1st base) and actually makes it. It helps his stats at the year end, but would probably be scolded once he got back to the bench.



Obviously, these are all outliers (in some cases, pretty extreme), but I can just imagine a huge majority of players in the future playing the game for statistics instead of wins. Perhaps that time has already come though and I'm just too foolish/blind to see it.

 

[gp956]

Respectfully, you were asked to define "integrity of the game." You defined it with a fallacy. Can't do that. You can say "in my opinion" or "I think that" but you can't DEFINE it that way.

FWIW, I don't think you can define "integrity of the game" in such a way that supports your contention. Bottom line: your opinion is that steroid users and suspected users tainted the game. That's fine. But it's not a universal given (i.e. a "definition").

Also, my opinion is a lot closer to yours than others, but I can't leave someone out of the Hall for it. Baseball had replete opportunities to negotiate with the MLBPA to get testing included in the CBA in the 90s and didn't get it done. Blame can be placed on both parties but the bottom line is that until 2004, PEDs were not cheating by the rules of baseball.

Big REP if we had it.

 

[gp956]

Both of these. I like WAR (even though I have an elementary understanding of it) as it is kind of a nice quick reference to see how well a player performs against the "average". I can just think of some subtle instances* where commen sense and WAR may butt heads. Like I said earlier though, I think it is a very useful metric.

*Some instances that come to mind immediately (and I'll probably get myself into trouble here as I don't have a high level of knowledge on WAR and all of it's individual parts):
DEFENSE:
- In regards to the defensive metrics, lets say an OF'er always dives for the ball no matter score, circumstance, etc. He may end up having a better "zone rating" than a smarter OF'er who knows where and when to pick his spots (so as not to allow a double). Obviously, we all know that making a diving attempt usually doesn't end up in an error when it's not caught, but it may end up costing an extra base or a run later down the road.
- Errors, sometimes a player will go out of his way to make a great play (say the score was 10-0 ) that he'd normally eat (i.e. - a squibber down the first base line with a fast runner at the plate) in order to preserve a shutout, a no-hitter, or a perfect game for a pitcher, but his throw goes into the 1st base stands.
PITCHING:
- A pitcher (I remember Jamie Moyer most recently when he was with the M's) might go more innings/outs than he should in a lopsided loss or win, when normally in a close game they'd be yanked, but they're going as long as they can to save the BP.
- A pitcher who knows a person has ownage on them, so they do an unintentional/intentional walk to the player to pitch to somebody less threatening, but their WHIP goes up.
OFFENSE:
- A guy goes for a stolen base in an unwise situation (say, down by 3 runs with nobody out in the 9th inning and only him on 1st base) and actually makes it. It helps his stats at the year end, but would probably be scolded once he got back to the bench.



Obviously, these are all outliers (in some cases, pretty extreme), but I can just imagine a huge majority of players in the future playing the game for statistics instead of wins. Perhaps that time has already come though and I'm just too foolish/blind to see it.

Those are all valid points.

 

[filosofy29]

Those are all valid points.

Thank you sir.

Also, could there be such thing as Anti-WAR? For instance, say that.....oh, let's use Benjie Molina for example .....was an OBP machine (I know, I know), would his high OBP be counted against him for war since he'd make it harder for all the players behind him to accumulate their RAA???

 

[gp956]

Thank you sir.

Also, could there be such thing as Anti-WAR? For instance, say that.....oh, let's use Benjie Molina for example .....was an OBP machine (I know, I know), would his high OBP be counted against him for war since he'd make it harder for all the players behind him to accumulate their RAA???

There's no reason there couldn't be with data fine grained enough. Although, rather than a negative impact, you'd just scale to some baseline.

 

[filosofy29]

There's no reason there couldn't be with data fine grained enough. Although, rather than a negative impact, you'd just scale to some baseline.

Do you think that's the next evolution of advanced metrics (or is it already here)? I.e. - a leadoff hitter who has a game built around speed would have his OBP category weighted higher than his SLG% and vice versa for power hitters?

 

[calsnowskier]

Respectfully, you were asked to define "integrity of the game." You defined it with a fallacy. Can't do that. You can say "in my opinion" or "I think that" but you can't DEFINE it that way.

FWIW, I don't think you can define "integrity of the game" in such a way that supports your contention. Bottom line: your opinion is that steroid users and suspected users tainted the game. That's fine. But it's not a universal given (i.e. a "definition").

Also, my opinion is a lot closer to yours than others, but I can't leave someone out of the Hall for it. Baseball had replete opportunities to negotiate with the MLBPA to get testing included in the CBA in the 90s and didn't get it done. Blame can be placed on both parties but the bottom line is that until 2004, PEDs were not cheating by the rules of baseball.

And I am not leaving them out at all. I am simply not giving them my vote THEIR FIRST YEAR OF ELIGIBILITY.

 

[4thstreet]

Both of these. I like WAR (even though I have an elementary understanding of it) as it is kind of a nice quick reference to see how well a player performs against the "average". I can just think of some subtle instances* where commen sense and WAR may butt heads. Like I said earlier though, I think it is a very useful metric.

*Some instances that come to mind immediately (and I'll probably get myself into trouble here as I don't have a high level of knowledge on WAR and all of it's individual parts):
DEFENSE:
- In regards to the defensive metrics, lets say an OF'er always dives for the ball no matter score, circumstance, etc. He may end up having a better "zone rating" than a smarter OF'er who knows where and when to pick his spots (so as not to allow a double). Obviously, we all know that making a diving attempt usually doesn't end up in an error when it's not caught, but it may end up costing an extra base or a run later down the road.
- Errors, sometimes a player will go out of his way to make a great play (say the score was 10-0 ) that he'd normally eat (i.e. - a squibber down the first base line with a fast runner at the plate) in order to preserve a shutout, a no-hitter, or a perfect game for a pitcher, but his throw goes into the 1st base stands.
PITCHING:
- A pitcher (I remember Jamie Moyer most recently when he was with the M's) might go more innings/outs than he should in a lopsided loss or win, when normally in a close game they'd be yanked, but they're going as long as they can to save the BP.
- A pitcher who knows a person has ownage on them, so they do an unintentional/intentional walk to the player to pitch to somebody less threatening, but their WHIP goes up.
OFFENSE:
- A guy goes for a stolen base in an unwise situation (say, down by 3 runs with nobody out in the 9th inning and only him on 1st base) and actually makes it. It helps his stats at the year end, but would probably be scolded once he got back to the bench.



Obviously, these are all outliers (in some cases, pretty extreme), but I can just imagine a huge majority of players in the future playing the game for statistics instead of wins. Perhaps that time has already come though and I'm just too foolish/blind to see it.

very good point

Paul Blair,Frank Robinson,Al Kaline are a few that come to mind,that knew where to be before the batter even hit the ball.

 

[SF11704]

Just another take on the 'Integrity of the Game' .... for me the integrity of the game is about the game itself. These are the rules and regulations that govern the game itself. Then there is the 'Integrity of the Players' ... this is where the slope gets very slippery .... I found these definitions online - interesting view. In summary there are TWO very different models that are both valid to define 'Integrity of the player' .. or how the game is played

Sportsmanship Model
To a sportsman, the way he/she plays the game is central. Sports are seen as special activities where honor is found. The goal is honorable competition in pursuit of victory.
The sportsmanship model demands a commitment to principles of integrity including compliance with the letter and spirit of the rules even when one could get away with violations.
Coaches and players who practice sportsmanship can be at a disadvantage when competing against others who practice gamesmanship.
A true sportsperson is willing to lose rather than sacrifice ethical principles to win. If you aren’t willing to lose, you may be willing to do unethical things to win.
A victory attained by cheating or other forms of unethical conduct is unearned and dishonorable. A true sports person believes that winning without honor is not a true victory. Coaches must remind themselves and their athletes that true competition means pursuing victory with honor.

The Gamesmanship Model
Gamesmanship sanctions ways of bending, evading and breaking the rules to provide a competitive advantage.
The only thing that really matters is winning.
It’s the Officials’ Job to Catch Me:
It’s only cheating if you get caught.
It’s the officials’ job to enforce the rules and not our responsibility to follow them.
There are no criteria for drawing a line between what’s acceptable and what’s not.

 

[gp956]

That's my problem with it. It can be very useful, but it doesn't tell the whole story and many times you just have to look at the whole picture and figure it out for yourself.

Yeah, methodological issues aside, the biggest problem with it is it leads people who or ignorant of "the game" to think they know something.

 

[gp956]

Do you think that's the next evolution of advanced metrics (or is it already here)? I.e. - a leadoff hitter who has a game built around speed would have his OBP category weighted higher than his SLG% and vice versa for power hitters?

Kind of. You'd add a term to your model for each new piece of fine grained data you bring into your analysis. You'd then "run" your model against real world outcomes to get the parameter values for each term. There's a lot of art, as well as detailed knowledge of the thing your modeling, to end up with something meaningful.

 

[gp956]

Susan Slusher, the president of the BBWAA, to paraphrase: amphetamines were not cheating, steroids were cheating.

One of her reasons: amphetamines were legal, steroids were not. <--- so much fail in that.

And a rationalization: "they did it for the money".

The writers won't do it of course, because who really does it with anything we accept without thought, but before the question of how to handle the steroid era can be properly handled, all the premises need to be vetted, so we can at least separate out those who are clearly biased from those who are simply misinformed. Of course, that will never happen. Not in this generation.

 

[tzill]

Susan Slusher, the president of the BBWAA, to paraphrase: amphetamines were not cheating, steroids were cheating.

One of her reasons: amphetamines were legal, steroids were not. <--- so much fail in that.

And a rationalization: "they did it for the money".

The writers won't do it of course, because who really does it with anything we accept without thought, but before the question of how to handle the steroid era can be properly handled, all the premises need to be vetted, so we can at least separate out those who are clearly biased from those who are simply misinformed. Of course, that will never happen. Not in this generation.

She's always struck me as a dimwit, honestly. Here's more of her screed:

Another compelling argument from the let-everyone-in side is that the vast majority of players in the 1970s and '80s were using illegal amphetamines to make it through the long months of the baseball season. That is a serious issue that I do not want to downplay, but amphetamine use was not hidden and the playing field was pretty even because the usage was so widespread.
There is something about hiding in a bathroom and injecting an illegal substance that alters body chemistry that seems so much more subversive and character warping. There is great secrecy and shame associated with steroid use, because it is so clearly wrong. Players know they are doing something dishonest and illegal. There was never, ever that sense with amphetamines.

I'm not sure where to start. The method of taking illegal yet condoned drugs, and the location where they're taken, is enough to shift a Hall of Fame vote from Yes to No? (Injection? In a bathroom? Yuck! No yucky people in the Hall of Fame!) Everyone was doing greenies, so it was kind of OK, at least OK enough to make a Hall of Fame voter look the other way? Steroid use was hidden? Didn't a reporter once point to a bottle on the shelf of Mark McGwire's open locker and say, hey, what's the andro for? It didn't seem to be a shameful secret at the time.

It must be hard to write on deadline when you're twisted into a pretzel.

 

[gp956]

She's always struck me as a dimwit, honestly. Here's more of her screed:

Another compelling argument from the let-everyone-in side is that the vast majority of players in the 1970s and '80s were using illegal amphetamines to make it through the long months of the baseball season. That is a serious issue that I do not want to downplay, but amphetamine use was not hidden and the playing field was pretty even because the usage was so widespread.
There is something about hiding in a bathroom and injecting an illegal substance that alters body chemistry that seems so much more subversive and character warping. There is great secrecy and shame associated with steroid use, because it is so clearly wrong. Players know they are doing something dishonest and illegal. There was never, ever that sense with amphetamines.

I'm not sure where to start. The method of taking illegal yet condoned drugs, and the location where they're taken, is enough to shift a Hall of Fame vote from Yes to No? (Injection? In a bathroom? Yuck! No yucky people in the Hall of Fame!) Everyone was doing greenies, so it was kind of OK, at least OK enough to make a Hall of Fame voter look the other way? Steroid use was hidden? Didn't a reporter once point to a bottle on the shelf of Mark McGwire's open locker and say, hey, what's the andro for? It didn't seem to be a shameful secret at the time.

It must be hard to write on deadline when you're twisted into a pretzel.

I have the same problem with her comments, where to begin to unwrap so many layers of fail. And to what end? It would be like being transported to the Continental Congress and arguing that the phrase "all men are created equal" should actually apply to everyone. I'll give it 25 years before a rational discussion of PED use is the norm.

 

[SFGRTB]

Bonds is the best I've ever seen, and Griffey is close. But you know who belongs on that list too? Bo Jackson...seriously. That guy could do stuff I've never seen another player do. I think of him the way old timers describe seeing Willie Mays do things.

Bo turns 50 today.

 

[Heathbar012]

Bo turns 50 today.

Bo knows middle-aged.

 

[msgkings322]

Bo knows middle-aged.

I bet he can still stretch a single into a triple and throw a no-bounce seed from CF to home plate

 

[SFGRTB]

I bet he can still stretch a single into a triple and throw a no-bounce seed from CF to home plate

He could still run over Brian Bosworth too.

 

[Mays-Fan]

I bet he can still stretch a single into a triple and throw a no-bounce seed from CF to home plate

...and let's add running up vertical outfield walls.

 

[msgkings322]

...and let's add running up vertical outfield walls.

Was a damn shame the way he got hurt in his prime, he was set to dominate both sports.