Posted by burnsy483 on 1/17/2015 9:26:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/17/2015 7:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 1/16/2015 7:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by examinerebb on 1/16/2015 6:40:00 PM (view original):
Here is the downfall of these stats, especially when it comes to the Hall of Fame.  You can use them to approximate comparative effectiveness across eras, but you can't use them to judge impact on the game.  I'm sure by these metrics that Tom Glavine was a superior pitcher to Nolan Ryan.  I've told my kids stories about watching Nolan pitch.  Seeing batters wandering up to the plate from the on-deck circle, defeated before they'd seen a pitch.  Hearing him grunt with every pitch and hearing his fastball sizzle like bacon from behind the plate in a near-empty Kingdome.  What story do I tell my kids about Tom Glavine?  "One time, he threw a fastball eight inches outside and the umpire called it a strike."  Nolan Ryan, in my mind, is a vastly superior Hall of Famer.  The same can said for Biggio.  Are you going to regale your kids with tales of Biggio being hit by a pitch?  Was there ever a point where you watched Biggio and thought "I'm watching a Hall of Famer?"  I'm not sure Biggio was ever the best 2B in baseball, maybe not even the best player on his team at any point.  Yet he is a rubber-stamped Hall of Famer.  I played baseball for 20 years.  I've been a fan for far longer than that.  You'd be hard-pressed to argue that I need to deepen my understanding of the game.  But I simply can't understand this necessity to break a player's career down to digits and have that tell his story.

I've found that there are plenty of people who played baseball - including guys with long Major League careers - who are very poor at evaluating players, by watching them or through statistical analysis.  So saying you played baseball isn't going to prove anything.  Especially if you are going to sit there and say you don't think Biggio was ever the best 2B in the majors.  Who, exactly, would you take over him through the mid-'90s?  Knoblauch?  Even Alomar, who was at least near his prime, was clearly a step behind Biggio from my perspective.  I was pretty young at the time, but I was also an Orioles fan.

Just because Nolan Ryan threw hard doesn't make him a great pitcher.  He walked SOOOO many guys.  I would think that would have been infuriating to fans of his various teams.  It makes him fun to watch.  But it doesn't make him better or more "impactful."

I believe ebb was trying to explain the "feel" of a HOFer.    As I've said a million times, the HOF isn't decided by numbers alone.    Now that the PED guys aren't getting elected, there is no magic number(300 wins, 500 homers, etc, etc).    Whether that "feel" is media-created or not, it's real.    That's why comparing Biggio to Jeter is folly.    Watching Jeter, you felt like you were watching a future HOF player.   Dads could tell their kids "Pay attention.   He's going to be in the HOF one day" pretty damn early in his career.  I can't imagine anyone outside the Biggio family/Astro fans saying that down in Houston. 

You knew Ryan was going to be in the HOF, if only for his "moments", not so much with Glavine.

Biggio and Jeter are pretty similar, aside from that media-created "feel" you describe, and the fact that Biggio didn't play on championship teams. I don't put nearly as much stock into this "feel", the literal "Fame" part of the Hall of Fame that you do.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/16/2015 6:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ncmusician_7 on 1/16/2015 5:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/16/2015 12:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ncmusician_7 on 1/15/2015 8:44:00 PM (view original):
Pitcher A -- ERA of 2.50, ERA+ of 200..............Pitcher B -- ERA of 2.00, ERA+ of 200     bad_luck, do you consider these pitchers to be equivalent (assuming the same IP, etc)?

I don't know, probably. That's the point of ERA+. It takes into account the fact that it may be easier/harder to have a lower ERA at different times throughout history.

For example, a pitcher with a 3.50 ERA in 2006 had a significantly better season than a pitcher with a 2.50 ERA in 1908, assuming equal IP, etc.

The 1908 pitcher would have a slightly lower ERA#.

Not "slightly."

A pitcher in 2006 with an ERA of 3.50, had, depending on league and ballpark, an ERA+ somewhere between 128 and 145.

A pitcher in 1908 with an ERA of 2.50, had, depending on league and ballpark, an ERA+ somewhere between 90 and 97.

Mexican League players?    Japanese League?    Why just Negro League?

3. Eligible Candidates -- Candidates to be eligible must meet the following requirements:

A. A baseball player must have been active as a player in the Major Leagues at some time during a period beginning fifteen (15) years before and ending five (5) years prior to election.

B. Player must have played in each of ten (10) Major League championship seasons, some part of which must have been within the period described in 3(A).

C. Player shall have ceased to be an active player in the Major Leagues at least five (5) calendar years preceding the election but may be otherwise connected with baseball.

D. In case of the death of an active player or a player who has been retired for less than five (5) full years, a candidate who is otherwise eligible shall be eligible in the next regular election held at least six (6) months after the date of death or after the end of the five (5) year period, whichever occurs first.

E. Any player on Baseball's ineligible list shall not be an eligible candidate.