Top 10 poll #11: #11 player in history - Runoff

[Clayton]

There is no one else even in the discussion.

Raines, Brock, Lofton etc hardly even belong in the discussion for #2 if Rickey is #1. Rickey should be #1, #2, #3, #4 AND #5. He is THAT dominant.

I grew up in the 80s so I'm pretty biased when it comes to valuing speed on the bases. I think 12-16 Henderson should come off the board. Somewhere in there.

 

[calsnowskier]

I grew up in the 80s so I'm pretty biased when it comes to valuing speed on the bases. I think 12-16 Henderson should come off the board. Somewhere in there.

I don’t disagree.

I have Hornsby here (criminally late, imho), and probably Wagner next. But then there is a large pool for me to consider, and Rickey is absolutely in that pool.

 

[Clayton]

I don’t disagree.

I have Hornsby here (criminally late, imho), and probably Wagner next. But then there is a large pool for me to consider, and Rickey is absolutely in that pool.

Wagner and Speaker are two that are going to be hard for me to place. Cy Young as well. I think I have Speaker the highest of the three but not something Im married to

 

[MilkSpiller22]

i hope wagner/speaker/young are not next... they are where my line is... ARod is close enough to Wagner, if not better...

Trout is close enough to speaker, actually has the better WAR7.

young is ranked 10th in adjWAR7, behind clemens, randy Johnson, Pedro, Maddux and seaver...

in no way, should any of those three go next... at some point, when even the mighty WAR shows it, why are we still focusing on compilers from yesteryear


i get Hornsby... and really have no problem with him at 11...

 

[Clayton]

I dont know about Trout quite this high. 9 great years....Id have Pujols ahead of that

 

[calsnowskier]

i hope wagner/speaker/young are not next... they are where my line is... ARod is close enough to Wagner, if not better...

ARod didn’t play baseball. I think I am settling into NEVER considering him in this discussion.

Trout is close enough to speaker, actually has the better WAR7.

Speaker is not a WAR7 player. Making the deciding factor a factor that only 1 of the 2 care about is an unfair comparison, imho. I don’t necessarily disagree with your conclusion, I just don’t like using that path to get there.

young is ranked 10th in adjWAR7, behind clemens, Johnson, Pedro, Maddux and seaver...

Using WAR (or any of its derivatives) for pitchers is a non-starter for me. AdjWAR is garbage, imho for anyone. WAY too much opinion and assumptions added to get their numbers (factoring in what Bonds might have done without PEDs or what Williams would have done if he didn’t go to Europe).

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I dont know about Trout quite this high. 9 great years....Id have Pujols ahead of that

i have pujols over trout too...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

ARod didn’t play baseball. I think I am settling into NEVER considering him in this discussion.


Speaker is not a WAR7 player. Making the deciding factor a factor that only 1 of the 2 care about is an unfair comparison, imho. I don’t necessarily disagree with your conclusion, I just don’t like using that path to get there.


Using WAR (or any of its derivatives) for pitchers is a non-starter for me. AdjWAR is garbage, imho for anyone. WAY too much opinion and assumptions added to get their numbers (factoring in what Bonds might have done without PEDs or what Williams would have done if he didn’t go to Europe).

did you look what adjWAR was?? its not perfect... but all WAR is not great anyway... WAR should only be used as a quick glance for a quick comparison...

but adjWAR7 is much better than WAR7 and JAWS for pitchers as it is the only one that doesnt ignore the fact that pitchers used to pitch over 300 innings per season... which is of course going to increase any WAR7...

 

[calsnowskier]

did you look what adjWAR was?? its not perfect... but all WAR is not great anyway... WAR should only be used as a quick glance for a quick comparison...

but adjWAR7 is much better than WAR7 and JAWS for pitchers as it is the only one that doesnt ignore the fact that pitchers used to pitch over 300 innings per season... which is of course going to increase any WAR7...

Again, for pitchers, I completely ignore WAR anyway, so tweaking it is pointless.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Again, for pitchers, I completely ignore WAR anyway, so tweaking it is pointless.

I don’t like war. But I don’t understand why someone would like it for offense but not pitching.

Do you mind explaining that?? I see adjwar7 to be the pitching war stat to look at. And I think it is just as strong as war7 for offense.

Although I think both probably need a better adjustment.

 

[LHG]

Henderson has a higher career WAR than Schmidt. I wouldn't call that 'very difficult' tbh

That is because Henderson played 7 more seasons than Schmidt.

 

[calsnowskier]

I don’t like war. But I don’t understand why someone would like it for offense but not pitching.

Do you mind explaining that?? I see adjwar7 to be the pitching war stat to look at. And I think it is just as strong as war7 for offense.

Although I think both probably need a better adjustment.

Pitchers all are slaves to their circumstances. SPs tend to get more innings, but they perform more of their activity in a “lessened” state due to fatigue. RP tend to have less innings, but their activity is typically all at a prime performance level (they typically won’t pitch while fatigued). The difference between SP and RP is less today than it was in 1963, but it is still there. But you still can’t just apply some modifier to adjust the numbers because SPs accumulate more non-prime performance activity than RPs accumulate. RPs also suffer from SSS much more than SPs do, so their numbers CAN be completely discarded and defend that strategy.

Until the last 10 years or so, almost entirely across the game, the best pitchers were placed in the rotation while the left overs were placed in the bullpen. There were SOME outliers that broke that rule (Smith, Tekulve, Gossage, Eckersley, etc) but the VAST bulk of pitchers followed that rule. While it isn’t as universal today as it was yesteryear, this is still the general rule today.

This is why one of my favorite stats TODAY for pitchers is IP. If a pitcher eats a lot of innings, they got there because their manager trusted them with those innings. And they are allowing the rest of the staff to rest and avoiding the end of the bully from having to get into the game. This pitcher may have a higher ERA, but the fact that they are trusted with their non-prime performance over the prime performance of other pitchers says a LOT.

WAR, as it is calculated today (no adjusted) treats a SP the same as it treats a bulk guy and the same as a close and a setup. Those are all different jobs. There can’t be a single number that compares them.

I have not looked at the exact calculation of AdjWAR. It is possible through, that the AdjWAR I have seen is not the same one you are mentioning here. Different sites have different calcs for WAR, so it is very understandable that specific derivatives of WAR would also use different calcs. But regardless, I think judging pitchers is much more within the situation than anything that can be converted into some universal stat.

 

[calsnowskier]

Admin question about this project…

Should I make ALL polls just 1 day moving forward? Is keeping the nom phase at 2 days still a good idea? I don’t know that extending it out is really adding much anymore. This is a running debate anyway, and we are usually 2-3 spots ahead of ourselves in the debate, so delaying closing out a poll by a day to allow more debate doesn’t strike me as critical anymore.

Thoughts?

 

[LHG]

Admin question about this project…

Should I make ALL polls just 1 day moving forward? Is keeping the nom phase at 2 days still a good idea? I don’t know that extending it out is really adding much anymore. This is a running debate anyway, and we are usually 2-3 spots ahead of ourselves in the debate, so delaying closing out a poll by a day to allow more debate doesn’t strike me as critical anymore.

Thoughts?

I'm fine with leaving it as is. Gives people more time in case they cannot sign in for a day.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Pitchers all are slaves to their circumstances. SPs tend to get more innings, but they perform more of their activity in a “lessened” state due to fatigue. RP tend to have less innings, but their activity is typically all at a prime performance level (they typically won’t pitch while fatigued). The difference between SP and RP is less today than it was in 1963, but it is still there. But you still can’t just apply some modifier to adjust the numbers because SPs accumulate more non-prime performance activity than RPs accumulate. RPs also suffer from SSS much more than SPs do, so their numbers CAN be completely discarded and defend that strategy.

Until the last 10 years or so, almost entirely across the game, the best pitchers were placed in the rotation while the left overs were placed in the bullpen. There were SOME outliers that broke that rule (Smith, Tekulve, Gossage, Eckersley, etc) but the VAST bulk of pitchers followed that rule. While it isn’t as universal today as it was yesteryear, this is still the general rule today.

This is why one of my favorite stats TODAY for pitchers is IP. If a pitcher eats a lot of innings, they got there because their manager trusted them with those innings. And they are allowing the rest of the staff to rest and avoiding the end of the bully from having to get into the game. This pitcher may have a higher ERA, but the fact that they are trusted with their non-prime performance over the prime performance of other pitchers says a LOT.

WAR, as it is calculated today (no adjusted) treats a SP the same as it treats a bulk guy and the same as a close and a setup. Those are all different jobs. There can’t be a single number that compares them.

I have not looked at the exact calculation of AdjWAR. It is possible through, that the AdjWAR I have seen is not the same one you are mentioning here. Different sites have different calcs for WAR, so it is very understandable that specific derivatives of WAR would also use different calcs. But regardless, I think judging pitchers is much more within the situation than anything that can be converted into some universal stat.

Baseball reference has basically fixed your 2 complaints.

They have a war just for starting and also just for games as reliever

And war7adj adjusts for the early pitchers who pitched well over 300 innings. It uses a max at 250 innings.

I too haven’t looked at the exact calculations and whether pitchers who pitched over 250 are condensed or projected or whatever.

But it’s a big difference than seeing all the top war7 all being yesteryear pitchers.

 

[calsnowskier]

Baseball reference has basically fixed your 2 complaints.

They have a war just for starting and also just for games as reliever

And war7adj adjusts for the early pitchers who pitched well over 300 innings. It uses a max at 250 innings.

I too haven’t looked at the exact calculations and whether pitchers who pitched over 250 are condensed or projected or whatever.

But it’s a big difference than seeing all the top war7 all being yesteryear pitchers.

Comparing this new number to existing WAR7 is a waste of breath. You might as well be saying it is better than judging their effectiveness by the color of the hair. Both are measurements that I fully disregarded before.

Maybe this new metric will gain traction and I can be pulled in. But just saying it is better than standard WAR (and it’s derivatives) is not an argument that will ever gain traction with me.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Comparing this new number to existing WAR7 is a waste of breath. You might as well be saying it is better than judging their effectiveness by the color of the hair. Both are measurements that I fully disregarded before.

Maybe this new metric will gain traction and I can be pulled in. But just saying it is better than standard WAR (and it’s derivatives) is not an argument that will ever gain traction with me.

Again. I don’t understand this. If you don’t want to use WAR don’t. WAR is very flawed.

But if there is a version of war that actually caters to your problem of it, then why do you lose faith in war there??

All war is going to be calculated similarly. Otherwise they would rename it a different stat.

But again. Now baseball reference has a war for starters as starters, a war for relievers as relievers. An adjusted war7 that uses a base of 250 innings so it can be compared generationally better.

You realize that WAR7 and jaws were created because of the popularity of WAR. They just continued to fix some of the problems it had. Not sure why someone who likes WAR would not believe that these new WAR stats do what they were intended to do.

 

[calsnowskier]

Again. I don’t understand this. If you don’t want to use WAR don’t. WAR is very flawed.

But if there is a version of war that actually caters to your problem of it, then why do you lose faith in war there??

All war is going to be calculated similarly. Otherwise they would rename it a different stat.

But again. Now baseball reference has a war for starters as starters, a war for relievers as relievers. An adjusted war7 that uses a base of 250 innings so it can be compared generationally better.

You realize that WAR7 and jaws were created because of the popularity of WAR. They just continued to fix some of the problems it had. Not sure why someone who likes WAR would not believe that these new WAR stats do what they were intended to do.

I like WAR for hitters only. I have always been very clear about that. I have never brought up JAWS. Not once. It may be that this post is the first time I have ever mentioned JAWS myself (in a baseball context).

Doing some kind of 250 IP conversion for WAR also doesn’t impress me much. I never looked at WAR162 for the same reason. I don’t care to extend a players effectiveness outside WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DID. The most important ability is availability. And WAR already factors that in. If you did it, it is in the number. If you didn’t, it’s not. For pitchers, a RP IS NOT as important as a SP. the starter eats innings. At the end of the day, that is the only thing that matters. In order to win the game, you need to record at least 27 outs. A guy who gets 15 of those is more important than the guy who only gets 3.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I like WAR for hitters only. I have always been very clear about that. I have never brought up JAWS. Not once. It may be that this post is the first time I have ever mentioned JAWS myself (in a baseball context).

Doing some kind of 250 IP conversion for WAR also doesn’t impress me much. I never looked at WAR162 for the same reason. I don’t care to extend a players effectiveness outside WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DID. The most important ability is availability. And WAR already factors that in. If you did it, it is in the number. If you didn’t, it’s not. For pitchers, a RP IS NOT as important as a SP. the starter eats innings. At the end of the day, that is the only thing that matters. In order to win the game, you need to record at least 27 outs. A guy who gets 15 of those is more important than the guy who only gets 3.

But again. There is a war that measures only for starts by a starter. As in if they make an appearance and it is not a start it is not included in that version of war.

 

[calsnowskier]

Last call. This poll closes in about 6 hours.