Posted by dahsdebater on 12/5/2014 5:50:00 PM (view original):
There's a reason I haven't been on Facebook for years.

At least here there are a handful of people who think before they type.

^^^ this guy didn't get the hint

I have a real problem with keeping out the PED players who didn't test positive under MLB testing procedures.  For the ones who put up numbers before testing, the higher-ups in MLB did everything to encourage their use of PEDs short of injecting them personally.  Who the hell are sportswriters (or we) to say "you did something that wasn't against the rules, was encouraged by those who ran the game and, because of that, you're not getting into the Hall of Fame"?

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2014 4:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by examinerebb on 12/5/2014 3:57:00 PM (view original):
Agreed. My argument was more in regards to Biggio, where I can't remember EVER thinking that he was the best 2B in baseball.

I think Biggio was probably the best 2b in baseball once or twice. He was at least in the running several years where he won both the silver slugger and the gold glove.

As I'm sure Jeter was probably the best defensive SS when he won his GGs.

I had this debate with a buddy of mine who is way more into the advanced stat aspect of baseball analysis than I am.  He told me Biggio was a mortal lock for the HOF and I was crazy to say Biggio was moderately better than Ray Durham.  Then he crunched the numbers.  Completely neutralized (for park effects, league, etc.) per-season stats (provided by him) for the two:

Biggio:  174 hits, 57 XBH, 16 HR, 67 BB, 24 SB, .282/.364/.432
Durham:  163 hits, 56 XBH, 15 HR, 65 BB, 22 SB, .270/.345/.425

He was shocked, but he still thinks Biggio deserves it because he played 6 more seasons than Durham at that level and, in his mind, durability counts for a lot.  And that's fine.  If you think being marginally better than Ray Durham over the course of your career, for 6 extra seasons, while picking up some GGs is enough to make the HOF, then Biggio gets in.  If you're arguing something different, you're kidding yourself.

Edit:  He also later argued that Biggio's peak was better than Durham's, which is true.

Posted by dahsdebater on 12/5/2014 6:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by masterdebate on 12/5/2014 6:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 12/5/2014 5:50:00 PM (view original):
There's a reason I haven't been on Facebook for years.

At least here there are a handful of people who think before they type.

^^^ this guy didn't get the hint

What hint?  If I make fun of you you might go away?  What ever would we do?

I said you're worse than Facebook. You agreed.

Again, that's fine.  I'm not trying to argue that Durham belongs in the HOF.  What I'm saying is that the voters telling us that Biggio is a mortal lock are the voters who didn't muster up a single vote for Durham when he was on the ballot.  They played in the same era and put up very similar numbers (again, per-season), so that seems odd to me.

Somebody steal your autographed Foucault first edition you jack off into?

Posted by dahsdebater on 12/5/2014 6:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by masterdebate on 12/5/2014 6:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 12/5/2014 6:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by masterdebate on 12/5/2014 6:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 12/5/2014 5:50:00 PM (view original):
There's a reason I haven't been on Facebook for years.

At least here there are a handful of people who think before they type.

^^^ this guy didn't get the hint

What hint?  If I make fun of you you might go away?  What ever would we do?

I said you're worse than Facebook. You agreed.

I said Facebook is full of mindless bullshit.  You apparently agree with that, but it seems to be right up your alley today...

If Facebook is full of mindless bs, and you're worse than that, which you haven't denied, or maybe you didn't get it, what's that make you?

Posted by examinerebb on 12/5/2014 6:31:00 PM (view original):
Again, that's fine.  I'm not trying to argue that Durham belongs in the HOF.  What I'm saying is that the voters telling us that Biggio is a mortal lock are the voters who didn't muster up a single vote for Durham when he was on the ballot.  They played in the same era and put up very similar numbers (again, per-season), so that seems odd to me.

I don't think they are really all that close. Biggio has Durham by ~30 WAR (essentially double Durham's total) and almost ten points in OPS+.

Posted by dahsdebater on 12/5/2014 5:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by masterdebate on 12/5/2014 4:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/5/2014 4:23:00 PM (view original):
So don't elect anyone who played from the last 80s to the mid 2000s?

Nope, just the guys we have evidence that they used. They players in the MItchell Report, Clemens, Pettitte, Glenallen Hill etc. or from other sources, BALCO (Bonds), Biogenesis (A-Rod, Braun etc) or confessions (Canseco, Caminiti etc).

So basically, what you want to do is punish people for A) getting caught or B) being honest?

"Sorry, douchebag, you shouldn't have confessed.  If you just shut your mouth or held on to 'deny, deny, deny' we'd put you in.  But since you told us the truth, you can wait 'til you're dead."

This.

McGwire is smacking homers and making bank.     Do you think Joe Average isn't going to check into McGwire's "training regimen"?    What about Jimmy All-Star?  Wouldn't he like to make a few extra bucks by "training" like McGwire?    All of sudden, he's borderline HOF. 

No one is above suspicion. 

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2014 6:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by examinerebb on 12/5/2014 6:31:00 PM (view original):
Again, that's fine.  I'm not trying to argue that Durham belongs in the HOF.  What I'm saying is that the voters telling us that Biggio is a mortal lock are the voters who didn't muster up a single vote for Durham when he was on the ballot.  They played in the same era and put up very similar numbers (again, per-season), so that seems odd to me.

I don't think they are really all that close. Biggio has Durham by ~30 WAR (essentially double Durham's total) and almost ten points in OPS+.

My buddy brought that up too.  My immediate question was "when setting the average, do WAR and "+" stats use pitchers' hitting stats in the NL, while using DH hitting stats in the AL"?

My buddy wasn't sure, which is why he figured out the normalized stat line.  If they do, you can't compare across leagues with any meaning.  The difference in hitting stats between AL DHs and NL pitchers would significantly skew your results.  If they don't, I'd be interested to hear the reason for the discrepancy, given how close the stat lines look.