Baseball and Statistics

[Lutherf]

Baseball, above all other sports, gives statistics nuts the red meat they crave. Just look at today. Cliff Lee goes 5 innings for Philly, gives up 11 hits and 8 runs but comes up with a win while John Lester goes 7 for Boston with 6 hits, 2 runs and 8 K's but gets a loss.

Back in the day, as a kid trading cards in the back yard, I was introduced to statistics. It was important to me to know if Vida Blue was a better pitcher than Jim Palmer or if I was going to get screwed if I traded Bobby Murcer for Rod Carew. The first time someone explained BA and ERA to me I got it even though I didn't know division even existed.

I'd like to dedicate this thread to statistics; What they mean, how valuable a tool they are, how much you rely on them, how they piss you off, which ones you look at, which ones you ignore, etc.

 

[Gardener]

I used to memorize Willy Mays' statistics like they were holy texts.

When I got older and read Bill James' first baseball abstract, and I realized I had just encountered God.

 

[StillBallin75]

As primarily a basketball and football fan I've been observing the trend toward analytics and advanced metrics (similar to the sabermetrics revolution in baseball). In basketball there are tons of newfangled stats like John Hollinger's PER, WARP (wins above replacement), team stats like offensive efficiency (points scored per 100 possessions) and defensive efficiency. With the advent of video tracking technology like sportVU and Synergy I predict NBA fans and front offices will have a lot more to work with in the coming years although the traditional box score will still be probably the most popular way of breaking things down.

In football you have advanced stats like EPA (expected points added) and WPA (win probability added) to gauge the effectiveness of a football team on a per-play basis which I find fascinating. And you have new stats that go beyond traditional passer rating for quarterbacks like ESPN's Total QBR rating.

I know it's a baseball thread but as far as sports stats in general go, I think they are a very valuable tool - if used correctly. Citing raw stats without context is going to lead to a flawed argument.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

 

[radcen]

I have been a fan since the early 70s, and I always paid attention to statistics to a certain degree. When they (statistics) took off in the sabermetric era I tried to keep up, but found that it was thoroughly ruining my enjoyment of the game on the field. It didn't help that, as an A's fan, many of my co-fans really got into it because of Billy Beane. As a result, they struck me as being more thrilled with the trade for prospects and finding that 'nugget' in trade, than actually winning games. That's simply blasphemy to me. So, I backed off, and started enjoying the game again.

 

[Lutherf]

I used to memorize Willy Mays' statistics like they were holy texts.

When I got older and read Bill James' first baseball abstract, and I realized I had just encountered God.

Mays is one of those players who totally transcends statistics. He was nearing the end of his career when I became a fan and played for an NL team in CA which kind of made him distant for me. Even when he came to the Mets he was still overshadowed (in my young mind) by Seaver and McGraw. I knew that he'd hit the second most HR's in history but the context wasn't there yet.

If you just look at basic stats Derek Jeter and Willie Mays are pretty similar. Jeter has a slightly higher career BA and more hits in less games than Mays. Mays has better power numbers. Is Derek Jeter as good as Mays? Hell no! He's a great player and a first ballot HOF'r but he's no Willie Mays. Jeter is significantly more likely to hit into a DP or strike out that Mays ever was. Beyond that Mays' power threat simply made him a more dangerous batter to face when runners were on.

 

[Gardener]

Mays is one of those players who totally transcends statistics. He was nearing the end of his career when I became a fan and played for an NL team in CA which kind of made him distant for me. Even when he came to the Mets he was still overshadowed (in my young mind) by Seaver and McGraw. I knew that he'd hit the second most HR's in history but the context wasn't there yet.

If you just look at basic stats Derek Jeter and Willie Mays are pretty similar. Jeter has a slightly higher career BA and more hits in less games than Mays. Mays has better power numbers. Is Derek Jeter as good as Mays? Hell no! He's a great player and a first ballot HOF'r but he's no Willie Mays. Jeter is significantly more likely to hit into a DP or strike out that Mays ever was. Beyond that Mays' power threat simply made him a more dangerous batter to face when runners were on.

I was lucky enough to see him play,and it was often facing either Sandy Koufax or Don Drysdale. THose werethedays!

Hed was incredible on the base paths, coiuld cover a ton of ground in C.F., had a great arm and super baseball instincts. He neverseemed to make a mistake.

 

[Linc]

Great new thread Lutherf.

Mays is one of those players who totally transcends statistics. He was nearing the end of his career when I became a fan and played for an NL team in CA which kind of made him distant for me. Even when he came to the Mets he was still overshadowed (in my young mind) by Seaver and McGraw. I knew that he'd hit the second most HR's in history but the context wasn't there yet.

When my Dad got stationed at Travis in 1961 from Ben Geurir in Morroco, he took me to windlestick all the time, as he called it.
Mays loses two years to Korea when with the New York Giants and then hits into the Pacific Ocean wind after moving west.
He would have easily hit 1,000 HR.

Yet that was just the beginning.
He is the first player, along with probably R. Clemente,
that I remember being called 5-tool players, though M. Mantle would have been there without injuries.
Watching Mays play the field as well as throw was a real treat, along with hitting for average.
Not to mention stealing bases or just plain going from first to home on a deep single.

We are all blessed to have watched the greats of the 50's/60's for our locales when they were on TV or when we could get to the ballpark.
In 1961, we would sneak listen to our AM transistors while on Boy Scout camping trips .

 

[Linc]

If you just look at basic stats Derek Jeter and Willie Mays are pretty similar. Jeter has a slightly higher career BA and more hits in less games than Mays. Mays has better power numbers. Is Derek Jeter as good as Mays? Hell no! He's a great player and a first ballot HOF'r but he's no Willie Mays. Jeter is significantly more likely to hit into a DP or strike out that Mays ever was. Beyond that Mays' power threat simply made him a more dangerous batter to face when runners were on.

I like your comparison of Jeter to Mays, but for my "mental" reasons.
I have never seen Jeter show up another player or umpire or act out in an embarrassing way to the game of baseball, mirroring Mays and the old-timers.

Maybe that's why Jeter's beloved in a city that has had more great players than any other, like Whitey Ford and Yogi Berra.
Imagine the Yankees, Giants, and Dodgers at one time in NY.
And SL and CHI as the west coast with two teams each .

 

[austrianecon]

Baseball, above all other sports, gives statistics nuts the red meat they crave. Just look at today. Cliff Lee goes 5 innings for Philly, gives up 11 hits and 8 runs but comes up with a win while John Lester goes 7 for Boston with 6 hits, 2 runs and 8 K's but gets a loss.

Cliff Lee left with the lead and Lester gave up the go ahead run. Name of the game.

 

[austrianecon]

Great new thread Lutherf.
When my Dad got stationed at Travis in 1961 from Ben Geurir in Morroco, he took me to windlestick all the time, as he called it.
Mays loses two years to Korea when with the New York Giants and then hits into the Pacific Ocean wind after moving west.
He would have easily hit 1,000 HR.

LOL, now don't get me wrong.. Mays is the best player to play but no way he would have hit 1,000 HR if Giants stayed in NY. He tailed off in his HR after age 36. Never hitting more then 30 and peaking at 28 for one season after his age 36. He would have had to hit 44 HRs every season he played plus the two years for Military service to hit 1,000 HR. He only hit 40 HRs or more 6 times in his career.

 

[Threegoofs]

I used to memorize Willy Mays' statistics like they were holy texts.

When I got older and read Bill James' first baseball abstract, and I realized I had just encountered God.

I got into it in the late 70s with strat-o-matic baseball. We used to run a neighborhood league and play all summer when we weren't playing real ball.

I found Bill James in the early 80s and loved it, then the original rotisserie baseball. We did stats by hand in the early 90s....

 

[Linc]

After Dad moved to Joliet APSA/JAAP during Vietnam in 1966, we got to watch Mays come to town and Ernie Banks.
Talk about two of the greatist for their cities.

Well, Mays had one of those days and the Sun-Times always had a caption above the box-score.
This one was: A-Mays-Ing .

LOL, now don't get me wrong.. Mays is the best player to play but no way he would have hit 1,000 HR if Giants stayed in NY. He tailed off in his HR after age 36. Never hitting more then 30 and peaking at 28 for one season after his age 36. He would have had to hit 44 HRs every season he played plus the two years for Military service to hit 1,000 HR. He only hit 40 HRs or more 6 times in his career.

 

[austrianecon]

After Dad moved to Joliet APSA/JAAP during Vietnam in 1966, we got to watch Mays come to town and Ernie Banks.
Talk about two of the greatist for their cities.

Well, Mays had one of those days and the Sun-Times always had a caption above the box-score.
This one was: A-Mays-Ing .

Still doesn't change the fact Mays would have never hit 1,000 HRs as you claimed.

 

[Linc]

Next time I'll have tracked down his career numbers.
Satisfied?

Still doesn't change the fact Mays would have never hit 1,000 HRs as you claimed.

 

[austrianecon]

Next time I'll have tracked down his career numbers.
Satisfied?

Willie Mays stats.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

I've been a baseball stats and trivia nut since the early 70's. I saw Mays and Aaron at the end of their careers, but I've read a ton on baseball history. Mays may have been the best that ever played, along with Ruth and Wagner.

I've always loved statistics oriented baseball games. Played Sherco tabletop for many years. I now play OOTP, probably the best baseball game ever invented.

 

[austrianecon]

Baseball got me into Statistics (odds if you really think about it).. and trivia wise I know my fair share. But my 5 greats to ever play the game.. is Mays, Cobb, Aaron, Brooks Robinson (for his defense), and Lefty Grove.

 

[radcen]

Baseball got me into Statistics (odds if you really think about it).. and trivia wise I know my fair share. But my 5 greats to ever play the game.. is Mays, Cobb, Aaron, Brooks Robinson (for his defense), and Lefty Grove.

I put Cobb ahead of Mays, but I accept Mays as a legitimate argument for possible #1.

 

[Lutherf]

Baseball got me into Statistics (odds if you really think about it).. and trivia wise I know my fair share. But my 5 greats to ever play the game.. is Mays, Cobb, Aaron, Brooks Robinson (for his defense), and Lefty Grove.

Ruth.

His lifetime BA is within 25 points of Cobb, his power numbers are astronomical and he could pitch. His OBP is 40 points higher than Cobb's and he has 300 more RBI.

It's not even close.

 

[radcen]

Ruth.

His lifetime BA is within 25 points of Cobb, his power numbers are astronomical and he could pitch. His OBP is 40 points higher than Cobb's and he has 300 more RBI.

It's not even close.

RBIs are overrated because they depend on having good players around you and what they do. Ruth had better teammates than Cobb, and for a long time, hence of course his RBIs would be higher. Plus, Cobb played the majority of his career, and all of his earliest best years, in the Dead Ball Era. Ruth didn't have that handicap.

Using statistics solely to compare the two is like comparing apples to oranges.

 

[austrianecon]

I put Cobb ahead of Mays, but I accept Mays as a legitimate argument for possible #1.

I would too, just listing them not numerical.

 

[austrianecon]

Ruth.

His lifetime BA is within 25 points of Cobb, his power numbers are astronomical and he could pitch. His OBP is 40 points higher than Cobb's and he has 300 more RBI.

It's not even close.

Yep, it's not even close, Cobb was and will always be the best player. Cobb had 2,000 more hits, more total bases, more SBs, less strike outs, and more runs scored. Bold are basic statistics which are key to being an effective player. Getting on base, getting in scoring position.

 

[Lutherf]

RBIs are overrated because they depend on having good players around you and what they do. Ruth had better teammates than Cobb, and for a long time, hence of course his RBIs would be higher. Plus, Cobb played the majority of his career, and all of his earliest best years, in the Dead Ball Era. Ruth didn't have that handicap.

Using statistics solely to compare the two is like comparing apples to oranges.

It should be noted that "Dead Ball Era" doesn't really refer to the baseball itself which was had a cork center starting in 1910 or so....about the time Cobb's career started. It generally refers to the style of play.

Ruth changed the game when he started hitting for power instead of placement.

 

[Lutherf]

Yep, it's not even close, Cobb was and will always be the best player. Cobb had 2,000 more hits, more total bases, more SBs, less strike outs, and more runs scored. Bold are basic statistics which are key to being an effective player. Getting on base, getting in scoring position.

First off, Cobb only has 1300 more hits than Ruth, not 2000.

Ruth spent the first 5 years of his career as a pitcher. He averaged 186 hits per year so if you factor those years as if he were getting AB's every day like Cobb was he'd have something like 3400 career hits which brings that 1300 differential down to 700.

 

[Threegoofs]

Yep, it's not even close, Cobb was and will always be the best player. Cobb had 2,000 more hits, more total bases, more SBs, less strike outs, and more runs scored. Bold are basic statistics which are key to being an effective player. Getting on base, getting in scoring position.

It's not close.

Ruth dominated the game like no other player ever has. He changed it for good.

Cobb was a great player, maybe the second best, but even in his time there were players like Honus Wagner who could arguably be considered better.

Ruth was an exceptional pitcher, and when he moved to hitting he was far and away the best hitter of his era.

If you look at Win Shares- Bill James way of rating players over seasons and Careers, Ruth dominates with 756 career WS- Ty Cobb is ranked second with 726. But Ruth dominates in WS per season, WS in his best three seasons, WS in five best consecutive seasons (behind Honus tho).

Bill James ranks Cobb #5 all time, behind Ruth, Wagner, Mays, and Charleston (negro leagues)