Posted by tecwrg on 7/29/2014 1:11:00 PM (view original):
Sez the King of bad faith arguments.
Fine, you don't like OPS+ . . . let's go to your precious WAR, ************!!!
Frank Baker had a career 62.8 WAR, ************!!! over 13 seasons (including partial seasons, one being VERY partial at 9 games). That's an average of 4.8 WAR, ************!!! per season.
Adrian Beltre has a career 74.9 WAR, ************!!!! over 17 seasons (including two partial seasons). That's an average of 4.4 WAR ************!!! per season. That's 0.4 less WAR, ************!!! per season for Beltre, despite averaging playing 18 MORE games a season than Baker.
Edge . . . Baker.
Oh . . . and do you really want to hold it against Baker that he hit so few home runs in the ******* DEAD BALL ERA? Are youi really that retarded? (No, don't answer . . . that was a rhetorical question).
Nothing bad faith about it.
I like OPS+. I think it's a great way to evaluate offense. But I don't think we should ever rely on just one stat, including WAR, if we want to make an in depth comparison. Unlike you, I don't dismiss a stat as ridiculous when it doesn't tell me what I want to hear.
Beltre's walk rate and, by extension, his OPS and OPS+ is his one real weakness. I seem to remember you agreeing with mike when he argued that it's a bad thing when a middle of the order hitter walks a lot, but that's beside the point (and incorrect).
Regarding WAR, it's a cumulative stat for a reason, Beltre played longer and provided more production, that's a good thing. Pro-rating it down makes no sense.
Like I said before, Baker is the closest to Beltre of the four. But I don't think he's better. It's hard to compare a turn of the century player to a modern one and, even if we agree for the sake of argument that he's better, that still puts Beltre 8th all time. Worthy, in my book.
7/29/2014 2:08 PM (edited)