Yes, but if it's rocketed off the wall in LCF, the LF or CF should have been able to bridge that gap in 2.1 seconds and snag the ball before it hit the wall.

Posted by tecwrg on 2/25/2012 10:19:00 PM (view original):
I'm still amused by jrd's assertion that home runs are completely the responsibility of the pitcher, yet balls in play are outside of his control.

As if there is a drastic difference in the pitcher's role in inducing a line drive that clears the outfield wall by six inches, and a line drive that hits six inches from the top and stays in play.

That's simply retarded.

Yes, that's mainly the part of FIP that I have trouble with.  And I won't go so far as to say that pitchers have no control over how well a ball is hit.  But I think we can all agree that a pitcher has more control over strikeouts and walks than they do on balls in play.

Posted by jrd_x on 2/25/2012 8:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 2/25/2012 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 2/25/2012 6:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 2/25/2012 6:49:00 PM (view original):
At this point, I'm willing to agree about disagreeing with jrd about Carlton v. Hunter.  He is unmovable in his conviction about Carlton.  I have mounds of evidence that tell me that his performance is indistinguishable from Hunter's during the period in which their careers coincided, and that they were equals in talent.

On the other hand, jrd's reliance on and application of certain advanced statistics and his disregard of others show that in terms of baseball intelligence, he is massively retarded.  His "debate" skills involve avoiding direct answers to questions, rehashing the same flawed arguments over and over, and constant reiteration of the point he is unable to intelligently defend.  In short, he is an idiot.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

Says the guy who argued that Pitcher A (8 years of Roger Clemens) was better than PItcher B (8 years of Clemens plus 5 more).

I don't know if I'll be able to look myself in the mirror after being called an idiot by a guy who is dumber than a box of rocks.

This coming from the guy who continues to prove he doesn't know the difference between "more" and "better".

How do you not get it that "more" is a component of "better?"

More doesn't always equal better as tec showed us with his Koufax/Moyer example.

But, as tec also showed us with his wonderful 8 seasons of Clemens vs 13 seasons of Clemens example, if two pitchers put up the exact same stats for x amount of years, one stops pitching, and the other continues to pitch at a high level for several more years, the guy who pitched longer is the better pitcher.

So, let's say for the sake of argument that Hunter was able to match Carlton's stats for the years he pitched - they were exactly the same stat wise from 65 to 79. And then Carlton went on to finish his career exactly as he did.  That would make Carlton the better pitcher.  Just like Clemens 8 vs Clemens 13.

And that would be generous to Hunter, since he wasn't better than Carlton in any stat other than WHIP...and well, we know how that goes.

We can all agree to disagree on BABIP. I've never said a pitcher didn't have control over how well a ball is hit, they do. They just can't control if anyone catches that ball.

So agreeing to disagree on BABIP, we're still left with the argument above. Carlton was better than Hunter.

For what it's worth - this is taken from the WIS stats pages (the Diamond Career stats) for both pitchers:

Carlton:
IP:  204
W:  13
L:  9
ERA: 3.19
K/9:  7.13
BB/9:  3.14
HR/9:  0.71
Fielding:  B
Range:  C
WHIP:  1.24
OAV:  2.40
ERA+:  118
ERC+:  116
OAV+:  106
WHIP+:  107
$/IP:  $25,987
Salary:  $5,301,512

Hunter:
IP:  232
W:  15
L:  11
ERA:  3.26
K/9:  5.25
BB/9:  2.49
HR/9:  0.97
Fielding:  B+
Range:  D+
WHIP:  1.14
OAV:  .231
ERA+:  112
ERC+:  124
OAV+:  108
WHIP+:  115
$/IP:  $26,487
Salary:  $6,145,114

That's interesting.  Then again, we don't really know how WIS calculates those values.  I'd really like to see someone answer to my year-by-year WAR comparison, but I guess that's too convincing in favor of Carlton.

Isn't WAR designed to show a players contributions to his teams wins, not measure who is the best player?

Tim Raines Career WAR is below Lou Whitaker, Edgar Martinez, Jim Edmonds, and Kenny Lofton.

Posted by The Taint on 2/26/2012 3:56:00 AM (view original):
Tim Raines Career WAR is below Lou Whitaker, Edgar Martinez, Jim Edmonds, and Kenny Lofton.

And that is one of the reasons that I don't think Raines belongs in the HOF. NONE of those guys belong in the HOF. I've heard all of the arguments about Raines and I still don't think he's one of the best of all-time. He was a fine player, as were Whitaker, Martinez, Edmonds and Lofton, but none of them were truly "great" players, and I think the HOF should be reserved for the truly "great" of the sport. This is why I feel that Blyleven shouldn't be in the HOF. He was a fine pitcher who amassed nice career stats due to his longevity, but I personally don't believe he was ever a "great" player. Sure, he might be the best #2 starter in the history of the game, but he was still a #2 and I don't think he ever crossed into "ace" territory. He only made 2 all-star teams, never won an MVP or a CY YOUNG, only won 20 games ONCE, never won an ERA title and he never led the majors in strikeouts. There was ALWAYS someone better than him and the things that got him into the HOF were all based on his LONGEVITY and not his GREATNESS. Yes, there is something to be said for his longevity, but the HOF should be about those who were the BEST, not those who were the 2nd best or played the longest.

Edgar Martinez was a SAVANT with the lumber.

The best right-handed hitter of my generation.

Hall-of-famer someday.

Martinez may well be the best DH of all-time and he'll probably get voted in eventually but to me, he's another borderline HOF'er. Martinez is even more limited by the fact that he was totally one-dimensional. To me, those borderline guys don't get in. The only reason Martinez MIGHT be an exception is because he probably IS the best DH of all-time and definitely could flat-out rake. Out of the five of Whitaker, Raines, Martinez, Edmonds and Lofton, Martinez would absolutely be at the head of the class and closest to proper inclusion in my view.

Why are Lofton and Edmonds even being mentioned in the same breath as the HOF?

I could at least listen to arguments for the other three but anyone who thinks Lofton or Edmonds deserves mention also deserves a kick in the sack.

Taint brought up those five guys with the point being that Raines had a career WAR below all 4 of the others. I don't think ANY of them belong.

Posted by The Taint on 2/26/2012 3:52:00 AM (view original):
Isn't WAR designed to show a players contributions to his teams wins, not measure who is the best player?

If a player isn't contributing to his team's wins, it's hard to say he was the best player.

Posted by rsp777 on 2/26/2012 10:02:00 AM (view original):
Taint brought up those five guys with the point being that Raines had a career WAR below all 4 of the others. I don't think ANY of them belong.

So taint needs a kick in the sack?

Taint was just poking jrdx.