I guess John Franco could be in the same mix...

Posted by tecwrg on 1/17/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
Scott Rolen is NOT a HOF player.

Stop this nonsense.

Of course not

Posted by dahsdebater on 1/17/2017 6:46:00 PM (view original):
Hoffman has a stronger argument as 3rd-best all-time than a lot of people seem to give him. I think Rivera is Hoyt Wilhelm is almost as obviously 2nd-best as Mariano is obviously best. If you consider Eck's innings exclusively as a reliever he's pretty similar to Hoffman but not clearly better. I'd put Billy Wagner 3rd, but Hoffman has a decently significant IP advantage. By the same argument you could take Gossage over Hoffman, but Hoffman has a significant performance advantage. You could also put K-Rod ahead of Hoffman. Not sure how he's been so overlooked. He was a hot commodity about a decade ago when he was a top-5 Cy Young finisher 3 times in 5 years and then everybody just started ignoring him. I don't know who else you could really put ahead of Hoffman. Maybe Firpo Marberry.

I think Billy Wagner should be in the HOF too!

Chipper Jones doesn't have any PED ties or suspicion. He should get a pretty high voting percentage, 96% is my guess.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/17/2017 6:22:00 PM (view original):
He isn't the second best relief pitcher of all time. He was a very good relief pitcher who has a high number in the "saves" stat column.

You understand longevity counts, right? The fact that he did what he did for as long as he did is pretty damn impressive.

To use another example, I would say a guy who had a .325 career batting average over a 20-year career had a better career than a guy who had a .340 batting average over a 12-year career.

Other than Rivera and Wilhelm, I can't think of a reliever that has had the prolonged success Hoffman did, at the level he did it. Wagner is closely behind Hoffman, but I still rate Hoffman higher.

Hoffman has the 2nd most saves in history, and the best save % of all time.

Rivera

Hoffman






everyone else

That argument would at least make sense if baseball history started in 1990. But since it didn't, it's really nonsense. To include nothing but saves and save %, when for the vast majority of baseball history those stats either didn't exist or were widely ignored, just seems way too narrow. For post-1990, I can see an argument that given how closers are used the only information you need to judge them is how well they performed in save situations. It ignores some really good 7th- and 8th-inning guys, or guys who pitched in a variety of roles throughout their careers. It also emphasizes closers from teams that generate more save opportunities. But I get it, and I can see a sense in which it's a logical model to simplify all the pitching stats available today. But there's no way that fairly treats guys like Gossage, Fingers, Sutter, and Wilhelm. And as I said, if you look at a more complete profile, I think you'll find that Wilhelm is the clear 2nd-best RP of all time. Or at least the semi-modern era.

Context is always important.

Wilhelm was mostly before my time. But Gossage, Fingers and Sutter were not. While their numbers may not look as impressive as Rivera, Hoffman and Wagner, it's important to understand how they were perceived when they played. They were impactful on the game. When they entered a game, the rest of the game changed. The numbers that show the context would be CYA results. Gossage was top 6 in CYA voting 5 times. Fingers was top 8 four times, including a win and an MVP. Sutter was top 5 five times, including a win. In comparison to Rivera, who is without question the best relief pitcher in the history of the game, he was top 8 in CYA voting 6 times . . . not much different from Gossage, Fingers or Sutter. Hoffman was top 6 four times. Wagner only received CYA votes twice in his career.

It's easy to just look at raw stats, or even adjusted/normalized "advanced stats" and think that's all you need to evaluate players. That's what PSBL does ("I don't need to watch the games, I have the stats!"). But without understanding context, you're only seeing a part of the picture.

Goddammit. Stole my thunder with "I don't need to watch the games, I have the stats!"

FWIW, this is the reason it's easy to dismiss some guys, in my lifetime, without much consideration. Rolen never felt like a HOFer. His numbers pretty much back it up.

That said, it's also the reason one can miss on a player. A few years ago, I dismissed Beltre(I'm sure BL has the thread on file). Looked at his stats and was surprised. Still didn't think he was HOF but a flippant "No" was incorrect. He's continued to produce so now I don't see how he won't make it.

Posted by tecwrg on 1/18/2017 8:15:00 AM (view original):
Context is always important.

Wilhelm was mostly before my time. But Gossage, Fingers and Sutter were not. While their numbers may not look as impressive as Rivera, Hoffman and Wagner, it's important to understand how they were perceived when they played. They were impactful on the game. When they entered a game, the rest of the game changed. The numbers that show the context would be CYA results. Gossage was top 6 in CYA voting 5 times. Fingers was top 8 four times, including a win and an MVP. Sutter was top 5 five times, including a win. In comparison to Rivera, who is without question the best relief pitcher in the history of the game, he was top 8 in CYA voting 6 times . . . not much different from Gossage, Fingers or Sutter. Hoffman was top 6 four times. Wagner only received CYA votes twice in his career.

It's easy to just look at raw stats, or even adjusted/normalized "advanced stats" and think that's all you need to evaluate players. That's what PSBL does ("I don't need to watch the games, I have the stats!"). But without understanding context, you're only seeing a part of the picture.

Well, this is dumb. You're saying you trust the opinion of an award voter over the record of what actually happened.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/18/2017 8:52:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 1/18/2017 8:15:00 AM (view original):
Context is always important.

Wilhelm was mostly before my time. But Gossage, Fingers and Sutter were not. While their numbers may not look as impressive as Rivera, Hoffman and Wagner, it's important to understand how they were perceived when they played. They were impactful on the game. When they entered a game, the rest of the game changed. The numbers that show the context would be CYA results. Gossage was top 6 in CYA voting 5 times. Fingers was top 8 four times, including a win and an MVP. Sutter was top 5 five times, including a win. In comparison to Rivera, who is without question the best relief pitcher in the history of the game, he was top 8 in CYA voting 6 times . . . not much different from Gossage, Fingers or Sutter. Hoffman was top 6 four times. Wagner only received CYA votes twice in his career.

It's easy to just look at raw stats, or even adjusted/normalized "advanced stats" and think that's all you need to evaluate players. That's what PSBL does ("I don't need to watch the games, I have the stats!"). But without understanding context, you're only seeing a part of the picture.

Well, this is dumb. You're saying you trust the opinion of an award voter over the record of what actually happened.

Well, you're pretty dumb. Seeing that you missed the entire point about context and how players were regarded by the people who watched and covered the game when they played.

Maybe you should take the day off from posting. Try to figure out why you're so dumb.

He needs more than a day for that.

Posted by tecwrg on 1/18/2017 8:15:00 AM (view original):
Context is always important.

Wilhelm was mostly before my time. But Gossage, Fingers and Sutter were not. While their numbers may not look as impressive as Rivera, Hoffman and Wagner, it's important to understand how they were perceived when they played. They were impactful on the game. When they entered a game, the rest of the game changed. The numbers that show the context would be CYA results. Gossage was top 6 in CYA voting 5 times. Fingers was top 8 four times, including a win and an MVP. Sutter was top 5 five times, including a win. In comparison to Rivera, who is without question the best relief pitcher in the history of the game, he was top 8 in CYA voting 6 times . . . not much different from Gossage, Fingers or Sutter. Hoffman was top 6 four times. Wagner only received CYA votes twice in his career.

It's easy to just look at raw stats, or even adjusted/normalized "advanced stats" and think that's all you need to evaluate players. That's what PSBL does ("I don't need to watch the games, I have the stats!"). But without understanding context, you're only seeing a part of the picture.

So because the perception of relievers has changed, today's relievers should be penalized because they're not as revered as those of the past?

Zach Britton's 2016 season would have won him an MVP in the 70s or 80s. Hell, even the 90s, since Eck won an MVP with a marginally worse season. Is that season suddenly less valuable because award voters today are too "enlightened" to cast those votes for relief pitchers?

If Gossage pitched today, I have no doubts he would NOT be a Top 5 closer in the game. And then, by your own logic, since he isn't one of the best of his era, he'd suddenly no longer be a HOFer. Hoffman had a significantly lower WHIP and a lower ERA in a more offensive era. He was better than Gossage.

Another person completely missing the point.

Maybe you and PSBL can get together and start a support group.

Posted by tecwrg on 1/18/2017 8:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/18/2017 8:52:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 1/18/2017 8:15:00 AM (view original):
Context is always important.

Wilhelm was mostly before my time. But Gossage, Fingers and Sutter were not. While their numbers may not look as impressive as Rivera, Hoffman and Wagner, it's important to understand how they were perceived when they played. They were impactful on the game. When they entered a game, the rest of the game changed. The numbers that show the context would be CYA results. Gossage was top 6 in CYA voting 5 times. Fingers was top 8 four times, including a win and an MVP. Sutter was top 5 five times, including a win. In comparison to Rivera, who is without question the best relief pitcher in the history of the game, he was top 8 in CYA voting 6 times . . . not much different from Gossage, Fingers or Sutter. Hoffman was top 6 four times. Wagner only received CYA votes twice in his career.

It's easy to just look at raw stats, or even adjusted/normalized "advanced stats" and think that's all you need to evaluate players. That's what PSBL does ("I don't need to watch the games, I have the stats!"). But without understanding context, you're only seeing a part of the picture.

Well, this is dumb. You're saying you trust the opinion of an award voter over the record of what actually happened.

Well, you're pretty dumb. Seeing that you missed the entire point about context and how players were regarded by the people who watched and covered the game when they played.

Maybe you should take the day off from posting. Try to figure out why you're so dumb.

No, I see your point. I just think it's dumb. A pitcher's job is to get outs and prevent run scoring.

The people who covered the game in the 70s & 80s may or may not have understood that and they may or may not have reflected that understanding in their ballots. But we all have seen enough award voting to know that it's one of the dumbest ways to evaluate a player. Especially when using weird, arbitrary cut offs like top 6 or top 8.