Top 32 tournament CF Lofton vs Ashburn

[obxyankeefan]

Top 32 players ranked by BRWAR(as of 6/18/15).

Centerfield Bracket is:

1 W Mays 9
32 M Cameron 0

16 J Wynn 8
17 C Lemon 3

8 C Beltran 10
25 E Burks 1

9 D Snider 9
24 F Lynn 0

4 M Mantle 9
29 E Averill 0

13 W Davis 5
20 C Cedeno 4

5 K Griffey JR 13
28 B Williams 0

12 A Jones 9
21 J O' Rourke 0

3 T Speaker 6
30 D White 0

14 J Edmonds 12
19 V Pinson 1

6 J DiMaggio 4
27 B Butler 0

11 B Hamilton 2
22 K Puckett 7

2 T Cobb 9
31 T Leach 0

15 J Damon 7
18 M Carey 6

7 K Lofton 12
26 L Doby 3

10 R Ashhburn 6
23 T Hunter 1

1 W Mays 8
16 J Wynn 0

8 C Beltran 0
9 D Snider 9

4 M Mantle 11
13 W Davis 0

5 K Griffey JR 11
12 A Jones 0

3 T Speaker 10
14 J Edmonds 0

6 J DiMaggio 12
22 K Puckett 1

2 T Cobb 12
15 J Damon 0

7 K Lofton
10 R Ashburn

1 W Mays
9 D Snider

4 M Mantle
5 K Griffey JR

3 T Speaker
6 J dmaggio

2 T Cobb

 

[obxyankeefan]

Kenny Lofton Statistics and History | Baseball-Reference.com
Beat Larry Doby 12-3

Richie Ashburn Statistics and History | Baseball-Reference.com
Beat Torii Hunter 6-1

 

[calsnowskier]

A very tough matchup.

OPS+ (Lofton/Ashburn)
120 - 2/5
130 - 1/2
140 - 1/1

Ashburn clearly wins, but really by default. Neither had OPS+ as a weapon since both were basically lead off guys. Unfortunately, I could not easily find OBP+ numbers. By raw OBP, it looks like Ashburn was slightly better, but it really is hard to compare. Lofton had a oWAR7 of 33.7 vs 36.4 for Ashburn.

SB is a no-brainer. Lofton was near-elite, both in quantity AND in rate. He had 12 seasons of at least 20 SB at 75% or better. Ashburn was solid is quantity, but his rate was only mediocre at best. He only had 1 season with 20/75.

Ashburn was a bit better at the plate, but on the base paths, Lofton was CLEARLY better. I know Lofton was a solid defender, but I am ignorant about Ashburns D.

I will go with Lofton since he appears to have been better as a lead off hitter/base-steeler. But this was possibly the closest one yet.

 

[UK Cowboy]

A very tough matchup.

OPS+ (Lofton/Ashburn)
120 - 2/5
130 - 1/2
140 - 1/1

Ashburn clearly wins, but really by default. Neither had OPS+ as a weapon since both were basically lead off guys. Unfortunately, I could not easily find OBP+ numbers. By raw OBP, it looks like Ashburn was slightly better, but it really is hard to compare. Lofton had a oWAR7 of 33.7 vs 36.4 for Ashburn.

SB is a no-brainer. Lofton was near-elite, both in quantity AND in rate. He had 12 seasons of at least 20 SB at 75% or better. Ashburn was solid is quantity, but his rate was only mediocre at best. He only had 1 season with 20/75.

Ashburn was a bit better at the plate, but on the base paths, Lofton was CLEARLY better. I know Lofton was a solid defender, but I am ignorant about Ashburns D.

I will go with Lofton since he appears to have been better as a lead off hitter/base-steeler. But this was possibly the closest one yet.

Ashburn was great defensively, at the time he played, he was considered top 5 ever defensive CF

 

[MilkSpiller22]

stolen bases Lofton wins(not close)

Lofton- career=622(80%), best=75,6 times over 50, 5 times MLB leader
Ashburn- career= 234(86% but incomplete), Best=32,1 time MLB leader

XBT%(extra bases taken ie. taking 3rd base on a single when on first base)- Lofton wins

Lofton- career=55%, Best=78%, 3 times 60 or higher
Ashburn-career=52%, best=63%, 2 times 60 or higher

BB%- Ashburn wins

Lofton- career=10.2%, best= 14.1%, 7 times better than average, mlb average=8.8
Ashburn- career=12.3, best-17.8, 7 times better than average, MLB average= 9.3

BA- Ashburn wins

Lofton- career=.299, best=.349,8 times better than average
Ashburn- career=.308, best=.350, 6 times better than average, lead MLB in BA twice

defense- Lofton wins(close) based on dWAR
Lofton- career=14.7, best=2.3, 7 seasons having a 1 or higher
Ashburn- career=5.3, best=2, 5 seasons of 1 or higher

Career longevity- Ashburn(close)

Runs- Lofton wins(not close)

Lofton-162 game average=118, best=132, 6 seasons of over 100
Ashburn- 162 game average=98, best=111, 2 games over 100 runs


Have to give it to Lofton, he was the better baserunner, better defender, scored more runs... While BA and BB% were close...

 

[DragonfromTO]

A very tough matchup.

OPS+ (Lofton/Ashburn)
120 - 2/5
130 - 1/2
140 - 1/1

Ashburn clearly wins, but really by default. Neither had OPS+ as a weapon since both were basically lead off guys. Unfortunately, I could not easily find OBP+ numbers. By raw OBP, it looks like Ashburn was slightly better, but it really is hard to compare. Lofton had a oWAR7 of 33.7 vs 36.4 for Ashburn.

SB is a no-brainer. Lofton was near-elite, both in quantity AND in rate. He had 12 seasons of at least 20 SB at 75% or better. Ashburn was solid is quantity, but his rate was only mediocre at best. He only had 1 season with 20/75.

Ashburn was a bit better at the plate, but on the base paths, Lofton was CLEARLY better. I know Lofton was a solid defender, but I am ignorant about Ashburns D.

I will go with Lofton since he appears to have been better as a lead off hitter/base-steeler. But this was possibly the closest one yet.

Lofton is 108.8, Ashburn is 117.5. If you click on "More Stats" on the bbref batting page you can see the park adjusted league average OBP and calculate it manually.

 

[calsnowskier]

Lofton is 108.8, Ashburn is 117.5. If you click on "More Stats" on the bbref batting page you can see the park adjusted league average OBP and calculate it manually.

Thanks, I will review.

But I care little for career numbers. I care about seasonal buckets. I will need to calculate the OBP+ for each player over their entire careers for the type of analysis that I care about.

 

[calsnowskier]

So I did that analysis...

Lofton had 2 seasons at OBP+ over 120 (120, 121). Ashburn had 5 (121, 128, 134, 131, 125).

ARGH!!! This one is tough. Lofton was the MUCH better baserunner (assuming SB and SB% defines base running ability) but Ashburn was the better OBP guy.

I think I will stick with Lofton because Ashburns SB% was so bad. If you are not an efficient base-stealer, DO NOT RUN!!

Again, SUPER close.

 

[Cedrique]

So I did that analysis...

Lofton had 2 seasons at OBP+ over 120 (120, 121). Ashburn had 5 (121, 128, 134, 131, 125).

ARGH!!! This one is tough. Lofton was the MUCH better baserunner (assuming SB and SB% defines base running ability) but Ashburn was the better OBP guy.

I think I will stick with Lofton because Ashburns SB% was so bad. If you are not an efficient base-stealer, DO NOT RUN!!

Again, SUPER close.

Yeah, this one is incredibly close. I am trying not to be biased because although I like and respect Lofton and never saw Ashburn play, by all accounts and from everything I know about Ashburn, he was one of the nicest men ever to play the game and a great announcer for many years. So they are close but my case for Ashburn in response to the "season buckets" and base stealing points are this: I'm not exactly sure what you mean by seasonal buckets, but looking at Lofton's lifetime stats it seems like in an era of a 162 game schedule, he played considerably less games in a lot of seasons. And I believe one of the seasons where his OBP+ was over 120 was a season in which he only played 112 games. Ashburn was usually close to the maximum 154 and even led the league in plate appearances in a couple seasons while still putting up ridiculous OBP numbers. He was putting up great OBP numbers before people even knew what OBP was. Lofton was clearly far and away the better base-stealer but I am going to cut Richie a tiny bit of slack on this based on their respective situations. Ashburn played on some mediocre to bad offensive teams where scratching out an extra base to score that one run was more important and getting thrown out trying may not matter if the next 2 guys ground out anyway. On the other hand Lofton was on base with Manny Ramirez and Jim Thome at the plate in an era where a lot of guys were on steroids and homeruns were being hit in record numbers. So if you're gonna steal in that environment, you damn well better have a high percentage (which he did) because getting caught might mean that your team scores one less run when one of the big guys goes yard.

So I'm going with Whitey (and I swear it's not because I met him at a 76ers game and he gave me his autograph as a little kid in the mid 80's).

 

[calsnowskier]

Yeah, this one is incredibly close. I am trying not to be biased because although I like and respect Lofton and never saw Ashburn play, by all accounts and from everything I know about Ashburn, he was one of the nicest men ever to play the game and a great announcer for many years. So they are close but my case for Ashburn in response to the "season buckets" and base stealing points are this: I'm not exactly sure what you mean by seasonal buckets, but looking at Lofton's lifetime stats it seems like in an era of a 162 game schedule, he played considerably less games in a lot of seasons. And I believe one of the seasons where his OBP+ was over 120 was a season in which he only played 112 games. Ashburn was usually close to the maximum 154 and even led the league in plate appearances in a couple seasons while still putting up ridiculous OBP numbers. He was putting up great OBP numbers before people even knew what OBP was. Lofton was clearly far and away the better base-stealer but I am going to cut Richie a tiny bit of slack on this based on their respective situations. Ashburn played on some mediocre to bad offensive teams where scratching out an extra base to score that one run was more important and getting thrown out trying may not matter if the next 2 guys ground out anyway. On the other hand Lofton was on base with Manny Ramirez and Jim Thome at the plate in an era where a lot of guys were on steroids and homeruns were being hit in record numbers. So if you're gonna steal in that environment, you damn well better have a high percentage (which he did) because getting caught might mean that your team scores one less run when one of the big guys goes yard.

So I'm going with Whitey (and I swear it's not because I met him at a 76ers game and he gave me his autograph as a little kid in the mid 80's).

GREAT write-up, and GREAT points.

What I mean by "seasonal buckets" is that I like to look at each season as an individually wrapped entity and grade each on it's own merits. One of my favorite example as to why I like this strategy is Ricky Henderson. He played 8 seasons after he was a "done" as a player. Why count those years towards his value? Those crappy years take NOTHING away from the All-Time Great that he was during the 80s and much of the 90s. Looking at a player's career OPS or OPS+ tells me very little. How often was he significantly better than his peers (I have taken a 120+ as an arbitrary number to indicate that he was significantly better than the norm)? How often was he even better than that (thus I count the number of seasons he was 120+, 130+, 140+, etc)?

 

[Cedrique]

GREAT write-up, and GREAT points.

What I mean by "seasonal buckets" is that I like to look at each season as an individually wrapped entity and grade each on it's own merits. One of my favorite example as to why I like this strategy is Ricky Henderson. He played 8 seasons after he was a "done" as a player. Why count those years towards his value? Those crappy years take NOTHING away from the All-Time Great that he was during the 80s and much of the 90s. Looking at a player's career OPS or OPS+ tells me very little. How often was he significantly better than his peers (I have taken a 120+ as an arbitrary number to indicate that he was significantly better than the norm)? How often was he even better than that (thus I count the number of seasons he was 120+, 130+, 140+, etc)?

Thanks for the explanation. That makes sense. So in other words, those marginal years of dh'ing or whatever at the end of a career that can put borderline players like Tony Perez in the hall of fame can work against true all time greats like Henderson if you just look at career numbers.

 

[calsnowskier]

Thanks for the explanation. That makes sense. So in other words, those marginal years of dh'ing or whatever at the end of a career that can put borderline players like Tony Perez in the hall of fame can work against true all time greats like Henderson if you just look at career numbers.

Count against, or just not count?

I care little for counting stats. They are fun to follow and fun to talk about, but they dont really tell a whole lot. How many years was a guy an impact player, and how impactful was he in these seasons? Isnt that the REAL question about a players effectiveness?


Edit:
Sorry, I re-read your post and saw what you meant... Yes. Henderson's late years make his rates look less-God-like. But at that point in his career, he was playing because he loved the game. Why "punish" him for that?

 

[Cedrique]

Count against, or just not count?

I care little for counting stats. They are fun to follow and fun to talk about, but they dont really tell a whole lot. How many years was a guy an impact player, and how impactful was he in these seasons? Isnt that the REAL question about a players effectiveness?


Edit:
Sorry, I re-read your post and saw what you meant... Yes. Henderson's late years make his rates look less-God-like. But at that point in his career, he was playing because he loved the game. Why "punish" him for that?

yeah, I understand. I was just confusing things by throwing in my two cents about how the hall of fame voters have historically made their decisions. But yeah, Willie Mays flailing in the outfield on the Mets or Hank Aaron DHing for the Brewers or Henderson just having fun for a few years in his 40s should not diminish their legacy at all.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Count against, or just not count?

I care little for counting stats. They are fun to follow and fun to talk about, but they dont really tell a whole lot. How many years was a guy an impact player, and how impactful was he in these seasons? Isnt that the REAL question about a players effectiveness?


Edit:
Sorry, I re-read your post and saw what you meant... Yes. Henderson's late years make his rates look less-God-like. But at that point in his career, he was playing because he loved the game. Why "punish" him for that?

See, i disagree that career totals don't matter... But i do agree that career stats should not HURT a player, it should only help....

 

[obxyankeefan]

See, i disagree that career totals don't matter... But i do agree that career stats should not HURT a player, it should only help....

I like to go by 162 game average. That will hurt someone like Rickey.

 

[calsnowskier]

I like to go by 162 game average. That will hurt someone like Rickey.

I don't like that because that helps players who could not stay on the field and hurts guys who gutted it out.

These numbers are good to look at, but I like the bucket strategy better. The buckets show what the player did. Not what he theoretically could have done.

 

[Cedrique]

If you like seasonal buckets, this is your guy. He had the kind of career we expect everyone to have but the kind that rarely happens. Steadily improved in his 20's, played his very best in his late 20's early 30's, slowly declined in his mid to late 30's, then instead of a long, drawn out stint as a DH or part time player he came to a realization that the defense was failing him and pulled the plug on his career. One day he makes a couple errors in a game, the next day he's on tv crying. No military service, no extended injuries or chronic conditions that kept him off the field during his prime. He makes it easy to look at his baseball reference page and say "yeah, that guy was great"