2013-14 MLB Off Season Thread

[dawgfan]

It amuses/saddens me to see the differing treatment of Frank Thomas and Edgar Martinez by HOF voters. Thomas makes it in on the first ballot with 83.7% of the vote while Edgar - in his 5th year on the ballot - fell to 25.2%. The main argument I've seen against electing Edgar is that he was primarily a DH, having played 1,463 of his 2,055 games as a DH. Well, Thomas played 1,351 if his 2,322 games at DH - not as high of a percentage, but a majority.

And the funny thing is Thomas was such a poor fielder at 1B that the difference in career WAR numbers between the two is pretty small - 73.6 for Thomas vs. 68.3 for Martinez. Martinez wasn't a great fielder either, especially as he aged, but since he was at DH more often, he wasn't a liability in the field as much as Thomas was, and very nearly his equal with the bat.

Oh well - I've long since stopped caring so much about the HOF, and as time passes, more votes are moving from stodgy old-timers with aggressive, active ignorance of better data to newer voters much more receptive to that better data. I don't know if it will be in time for Edgar to get voted in through the normal process, but I have some faith that eventually a committee will give him his rightful inclusion in the Hall.

[miked]

Piazza was a great hitter, but a phenomenally bad catcher. Laughably bad. If he were a 1B (which he would have been suited for) he would not be close to HoF. And he's a PED-using pussy

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by miked

Piazza was a great hitter, but a phenomenally bad catcher. Laughably bad. If he were a 1B (which he would have been suited for) he would not be close to HoF. And he's a PED-using pussy

Is it his fault that teams had him play C?

I will assume Piazza would have probably hit 500+ home runs if he played 1B his entire career instead of Catcher. Even without playing 1B his numbers are impressive for any player.

[Suicane75]

Chris Wheeler and Garry Matthews out as Phillies announcers. Oh happy day. I'm doing my happy dance! Can ya'll see me? I'm dancing the dance of joy. Lalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalala!

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by miked

Piazza was a great hitter, but a phenomenally bad catcher. Laughably bad. If he were a 1B (which he would have been suited for) he would not be close to HoF. And he's a PED-using pussy

The problem is there's more data that supports the notion that Piazza was an underrated defensive catcher than there is that shows he was a poor defensive catcher.

Here's a quote from a Bill James article

http://www.billjamesonline.com/shoul...hall_of_fame_/

Craig Wright wrote an excellent article in The Hardball Times Baseball Annual 2009 called Piazza, Hall of Fame Catcher. He did a detailed sabermetric study that showed that hitters had a .723 OPS with Piazza behind the plate and a .748 OPS with other catchers. This 25-point differential is highly significant. In further studies that we did in The Fielding Bible—Volume II, we found that Piazza saved at least 20 to 70 runs more than an average catcher defensively, depending on the technique that we used.

And here's a Rob Neyer article that discusses the same thing:

So about Mike Piazza's defense ... - Baseball Nation

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

Chris Wheeler and Garry Matthews out as Phillies announcers. Oh happy day. I'm doing my happy dance! Can ya'll see me? I'm dancing the dance of joy. Lalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalala!

Let's see if you're still happy when they announce Ricky Bottalico as their replacement.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

It amuses/saddens me to see the differing treatment of Frank Thomas and Edgar Martinez by HOF voters. Thomas makes it in on the first ballot with 83.7% of the vote while Edgar - in his 5th year on the ballot - fell to 25.2%. The main argument I've seen against electing Edgar is that he was primarily a DH, having played 1,463 of his 2,055 games as a DH. Well, Thomas played 1,351 if his 2,322 games at DH - not as high of a percentage, but a majority.

And the funny thing is Thomas was such a poor fielder at 1B that the difference in career WAR numbers between the two is pretty small - 73.6 for Thomas vs. 68.3 for Martinez. Martinez wasn't a great fielder either, especially as he aged, but since he was at DH more often, he wasn't a liability in the field as much as Thomas was, and very nearly his equal with the bat.

Oh well - I've long since stopped caring so much about the HOF, and as time passes, more votes are moving from stodgy old-timers with aggressive, active ignorance of better data to newer voters much more receptive to that better data. I don't know if it will be in time for Edgar to get voted in through the normal process, but I have some faith that eventually a committee will give him his rightful inclusion in the Hall.

Well, does it help that Frank Thomas had one of the greatest hitting peaks in baseball history?

The Greatness of Frank Thomas | FanGraphs Baseball

The article writer does say maybe this will help Edgar Martinez, but I think one of the things shown is that Frank Thomas had a 7 year run every bit as impressive as Pedro Martinez.

[miked]

Originally Posted by Atocep

The problem is there's more data that supports the notion that Piazza was an underrated defensive catcher than there is that shows he was a poor defensive catcher.

Here's a quote from a Bill James article

http://www.billjamesonline.com/shoul...hall_of_fame_/





And here's a Rob Neyer article that discusses the same thing:

So about Mike Piazza's defense ... - Baseball Nation

Maybe I'm late to the metrics part of this, is there now data to suggest that catchers calling a game has a significant effect? Can this be separated from luck of the pitchers, or defense when the catcher is playing? I guess the runs he saved by calling a good game (or whatever) somehow cancels out the fact that he allowed 100+ SBs a season and threw out like 15-20% of runners.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by miked

Maybe I'm late to the metrics part of this, is there now data to suggest that catchers calling a game has a significant effect? Can this be separated from luck of the pitchers, or defense when the catcher is playing? I guess the runs he saved by calling a good game (or whatever) somehow cancels out the fact that he allowed 100+ SBs a season and threw out like 15-20% of runners.

Well let's start with your numbers...his career CS% was 23%. He threw out under 20% of runners four times in his 14 catching seasons: 1996 (18%) and 2002 (18% when he was 33), plus 2005 (14% when he was 35), and in 2006 (12% when he was 36) when he was playing half the year and I think we can all agree he had no business catching then. So he was under 20% in two of his prime years, very conservatively speaking as I don't think most consider 33 to be the prime for a catcher.

He was 8% below the league average of 31%. Using his career numbers, he allowed 142 more guys to steal bases. Some of those may have been stealing 3rd, and I have no idea the breakdown of guys who stole with differing numbers of outs...but let's for argument's sake say the average is with one out. Runners on second with one out score about 45% of the time. So his CS% would, very roughly, have lead to 64 more runs being scored against his pitchers over the course of his 1600+ games caught.

BTW if you pull out those last two terrible years from his career numbers, we're talking a career CS% of 25% and using the assumptions above it would have led to 47 more runs allowed.

[Logan]

I came in early to work to take care of some things and I ended up looking up actual/calculating hypothetical Mike Piazza caught stealing percentages. Oh well.

[Suicane75]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

Let's see if you're still happy when they announce Ricky Bottalico as their replacement.

I'll cross that bridge in the Spring.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

It amuses/saddens me to see the differing treatment of Frank Thomas and Edgar Martinez by HOF voters. Thomas makes it in on the first ballot with 83.7% of the vote while Edgar - in his 5th year on the ballot - fell to 25.2%. The main argument I've seen against electing Edgar is that he was primarily a DH, having played 1,463 of his 2,055 games as a DH. Well, Thomas played 1,351 if his 2,322 games at DH - not as high of a percentage, but a majority.

And the funny thing is Thomas was such a poor fielder at 1B that the difference in career WAR numbers between the two is pretty small - 73.6 for Thomas vs. 68.3 for Martinez. Martinez wasn't a great fielder either, especially as he aged, but since he was at DH more often, he wasn't a liability in the field as much as Thomas was, and very nearly his equal with the bat.

Oh well - I've long since stopped caring so much about the HOF, and as time passes, more votes are moving from stodgy old-timers with aggressive, active ignorance of better data to newer voters much more receptive to that better data. I don't know if it will be in time for Edgar to get voted in through the normal process, but I have some faith that eventually a committee will give him his rightful inclusion in the Hall.

I think both Frank Thomas and Edgar Martinez are Hall of Famers.

But I love how you basically use Thomas's defense against him in trying to promote Martinez. His defense is so bad that it helps make up some of the ground on the WAR difference. I don't think anyone really thinks of Thomas as a fielder. But the 13 WAR difference in hitting or 156 vs 147 OPS+ or, if you want to break it down to BWAA levels, 200 homers probably is more the difference.

SI

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I think both Frank Thomas and Edgar Martinez are Hall of Famers.

But I love how you basically use Thomas's defense against him in trying to promote Martinez. His defense is so bad that it helps make up some of the ground on the WAR difference. I don't think anyone really thinks of Thomas as a fielder. But the 13 WAR difference in hitting or 156 vs 147 OPS+ or, if you want to break it down to BWAA levels, 200 homers probably is more the difference.

SI

How is that different than what I said? Yes, Thomas was better offensively. He also played a bit longer (part of that was incompetence on the part of M's management) and had a much better peak.

But he also was worse defensively and was used in the field more such that his defense was taking away a bit from his offense.

Thomas is the better player. But the difference isn't so stark as to justify the wide gulf in voting totals IMO.

[Butter]

200+ home runs over a career isn't a wide gulf?

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

200+ home runs over a career isn't a wide gulf?

Nah, it's not one of the new sexy advanced metrics. Old stats don't count anymore.

Didn't you get the memo?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Good riddance to bad rubbish

Dan Le Batard barred from future votes on Hall of Fame - ESPN

[Logan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Good riddance to bad rubbish

Dan Le Batard barred from future votes on Hall of Fame - ESPN

It's great that the BBWAA stands up for morality.

[Logan]

Timothy Burke ‏@bubbaprog

Braindead moron/BS purveyor @JonHeymanCBS outraged by Le Batard, while utilizing zero energy to expose BBWAA members who voted for JT Snow.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Logan

Timothy Burke ‏@bubbaprog

Braindead moron/BS purveyor @JonHeymanCBS outraged by Le Batard, while utilizing zero energy to expose BBWAA members who voted for JT Snow.

Who (or what) the fuck is a Timothy Burke?

[Logan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Who (or what) the fuck is a Timothy Burke?

An editor at Deadspin.

[ISiddiqui]

So Gurnick gets to continue to vote, while Le Batard doesn't? Man, they are just trying to make this more and more of a joke.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Logan

An editor at Deadspin.

Thanks

(ftr I was completely serious with my question, I hadn't the foggiest)

[jbergey22]

Great News. I am guessing Le Betard got exactly what he wanted. This should outrage the public enough to complain for changes to be made. The twitter JT Snow comment made me laugh.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

So Gurnick gets to continue to vote, while Le Batard doesn't? Man, they are just trying to make this more and more of a joke.

At least Gurnick owned his vote.

LeBastard didn't.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

This should outrage the public enough to complain for changes to be made.

LOL

That would seem to require a lot more people to actually know who he is. Not sure there's many eligible voters that would qualify for that status honestly (Costas maybe, or is he even a voter?)

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

At least Gurnick owned his vote.

LeBastard didn't.

I thought people had a right to vote on "principle?" La Batard just sticking to his that the voting is f'd up.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

LOL

That would seem to require a lot more people to actually know who he is. Not sure there's many eligible voters that would qualify for that status honestly (Costas maybe, or is he even a voter?)

I think a majority of sports fans know who La Batard is. He is all over the radio and makes a few ESPN appearances each year.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Good riddance to bad rubbish

Dan Le Batard barred from future votes on Hall of Fame - ESPN

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

At least Gurnick owned his vote.

LeBastard didn't.

I get the whole authoritarian thing, and maybe it's just that, but I can't for the life of me figure out why this would upset a non-BBWA (I probably left off a few letters) so much.

Would it change your opinion if he had written a column and said that he would vote for the top ten write in submissions by his readers? In other words, is it his secrecy or the fact he crowd sourced?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I think a majority of sports fans know who La Batard is. He is all over the radio and makes a few ESPN appearances each year.

I believe you're grossly overestimating the reach, as well as the penetration.

I'd bet less than half of sports fans could correctly identify, I dunno, Herbstriet or someone of that level.

The average sports fan has never even consciously listened to sports radio period, much less be able to identify someone who appears on it.

(My point being that "sports fans" is a much broader group than the diehards on the internet, or even those consciously watching talking heads on espn)

[Logan]

(mlb.com's) Richard Justice ‏@richardjustice

We had a guy in Houston ask for fan help in filling out his HOF ballot. He still votes.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by digamma

I get the whole authoritarian thing, and maybe it's just that, but I can't for the life of me figure out why this would upset a non-BBWA (I probably left off a few letters) so much.

Would it change your opinion if he had written a column and said that he would vote for the top ten write in submissions by his readers? In other words, is it his secrecy or the fact he crowd sourced?

That he didn't vote ... that he handed it off to a self-selecting subset. I'd have the same opinion (presuming there wasn't an explicit permission to do so) of someone who did the same thing with a Grammy vote or an Academy Award vote, etc. (The fact I hold the subset he handed the vote off to in incredibly low regard plays a minor role at most tbh, although I'll acknowledge that it's a secondary factor)

I spent several seasons as a voter in the UPI college basketball poll back in the day. It was privilege I took very seriously, so I'm sure I'm even more offended by this to a certain extent because of that experience.

[Logan]

Jon are you similarly offended by the guys who voted for Jacque Jones, Armanda Benitez, and JT Snow?

[digamma]

Thanks for the reply. I think I understand where you're coming from and may compare it to my own annoyance of people trying to get out of jury duty.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Logan

Jon are you similarly offended by the guys who voted for Jacque Jones, Armanda Benitez, and JT Snow?

I guess this is the way I look at it. How seriously are these voters taking it that vote for these guys that dont even belong on the ballot? Its like voting a 2-10 team in the top 25 for college fb.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Logan

Jon are you similarly offended by the guys who voted for Jacque Jones, Armanda Benitez, and JT Snow?

Similarly? No.

The most frequent explanations (of the few I've seen) are some sort of tribute vote, while questionable perhaps they're ultimately harmless.

And any of those players you named are more deserving of a place in the HOF than a worthless piece of human refuse like Bonds.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Similarly? No.

The most frequent explanations (of the few I've seen) are some sort of tribute vote, while questionable perhaps they're ultimately harmless.

And any of those players you named are more deserving of a place in the HOF than a worthless piece of human refuse like Bonds.

Lets leave Bonds out of this otherwise this conversation will take a completely different turn.

[Logan]

I believe those are speculation, not explanations...as far as I'm aware, none of those who voted for those players have revealed themselves publicly so we don't know what their thought process was.

And Benitez may have been a bigger dick than Bonds.

[chadritt]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

That he didn't vote ... that he handed it off to a self-selecting subset. I'd have the same opinion (presuming there wasn't an explicit permission to do so) of someone who did the same thing with a Grammy vote or an Academy Award vote, etc.

I have some bad news for you then, thats common enough to be a running joke that assistants fill out the ballots.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by chadritt

I have some bad news for you then, thats common enough to be a running joke that assistants fill out the ballots.

That's not news ... that's something I've been aware of for years (at least with regard to college football).

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Logan

I believe those are speculation, not explanations...as far as I'm aware, none of those who voted for those players have revealed themselves publicly so we don't know what their thought process was.

Sorry, those specific players were not what I meant. I was referring to a few explanations I recall reading about similar one-vote-only guys in the past few years (the most memorable was a writer who voted for some player or another because he'd been nice to him & his dad when he was a kid, or something to that affect)

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Lets leave Bonds out of this otherwise this conversation will take a completely different turn.

I don't think we can leave him out here, he was on the ballot that was turned in after all (along with Clemens)

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I don't think we can leave him out here, he was on the ballot that was turned in after all (along with Clemens)

So you want to create an argument about this? Is that what you are getting at? Comparing POS PED users with some of the best numbers in MLB history to mediocre players that shouldnt even be considered are two different things IMO.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

So you want to create an argument about this? Is that what you are getting at? Comparing POS PED users with some of the best numbers in MLB history to mediocre players that shouldnt even be considered are two different things IMO.

I was asked I was offended/bothered by those (sub)marginal guys being on somebody's ballot. My point was that their inclusion isn't anywhere near as offensive to me as someone putting the PEDophiles on a ballot.

Ultimately it's harmless ... which is the exact complete opposite of how I see votes for that crowd.

[Logan]

Then you should be offended about the other 201 (Clemens) and 197 (Bonds) people who voted for them as well.

[Logan]

Also, in your opinion, are amphetamines users PEDophiles as well?

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I believe you're grossly overestimating the reach, as well as the penetration.

How has this not been noticed yet?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

200+ home runs over a career isn't a wide gulf?

I guess I missed the memo where home runs are the only results that count for hitters.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

That's not news ... that's something I've been aware of for years (at least with regard to college football).

So your objection is solely to whom he had help him with the ballot then?

Color me unsurprised.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Logan

Jon are you similarly offended by the guys who voted for Jacque Jones, Armanda Benitez, and JT Snow?

I think I can give the hometown paper guy get a pass (for instance, if the Twins beat writer voted for Jones) but, really, this year, he probably should have had 9 legit guys on the ballot- last year, too.

SI

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Logan

Then you should be offended about the other 201 (Clemens) and 197 (Bonds) people who voted for them as well.

I'd never let a single one of them anywhere near the Hall (voting or otherwise frankly) again.