Posted by Got_Worms on 11/17/2017 10:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 11/17/2017 10:35:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/17/2017 10:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 11/17/2017 10:10:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/17/2017 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/17/2017 5:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 11/16/2017 11:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/16/2017 10:50:00 PM (view original):
You really cannot trust the opinions about baseball from somebody who clearly has a low baseball IQ.

Why does BL think he has superior insight into baseball?

Because he's a proponent of advanced stats like WAR.

And he doesn't need to watch the games, because he has the stats.

LOL, you really don’t need advanced stats to see that Hunter wasn’t very good.

Wasn't very good or wasn't a HOF pitcher?

He was slightly above average overall with 2-3 outstanding seasons. So, good, not great. Definitely not a hall of famer.

OK, I can actually sort of see your point based on stats. Unfortunately I am too young and never saw him pitch so I cannot opine as others have how he did when he did pitch via the naked eye test. Where you and I disagree is the wins category. I do think it means something. I mean even Walter Johnson had wins when he pitched for some weak Washington teams. Same with Pedro in the late 90s with the Sox. To your point the Sox were not much better than an average team but when he pitched they certainly won a lot more than they lost.

You can't compare Catfish Hunter to Pedro or Walter Johnson, but he does deserve to be in the HOF!

My only point there was that wins are not an irrelevant stat.

They are, though. Pitcher win loss is at best useless, at worst misleading.

Posted by all3 on 11/17/2017 10:14:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/17/2017 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/17/2017 5:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 11/16/2017 11:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/16/2017 10:50:00 PM (view original):
You really cannot trust the opinions about baseball from somebody who clearly has a low baseball IQ.

Why does BL think he has superior insight into baseball?

Because he's a proponent of advanced stats like WAR.

And he doesn't need to watch the games, because he has the stats.

LOL, you really don’t need advanced stats to see that Hunter wasn’t very good.

You say " . . . to see that Hunter wasn't very good.". Are you old enough to have actually seen him pitch? To have seen how dominant and clutch he was when it really mattered? To remember how every team wanted him when he was a FA?

So I guess Mike Hampton should be in the HOF?

Posted by bad_luck on 11/17/2017 11:10:00 AM (view original):
They are, though. Pitcher win loss is at best useless, at worst misleading.

In 1999 the Sox were 94 - 68. Pedro went 23 - 4. Take away his wins and losses and the Sox were 71 - 64. His wins got them into the playoffs. You cannot just discount that stat because the #2 guy in wins on that team was Bret Saberhagen with 10. I could see your point if that Sox team were a potent offense and the #2 and #3 starters had like 15 and 16 wins, etc. But that was not the case. Sometimes wins can be misleading but it is not a MEANINGLESS stat is what I am saying.

People need to stop pretending they can evaluate the greatness and impact of a player from 30, 50 or 100 years ago better than his contemporaries or those who actually followed his career as it was happening. I trust them far more than I trust any stat geeks trying to retroactively assess his value today.

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/17/2017 11:22:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 11/17/2017 10:14:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/17/2017 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/17/2017 5:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 11/16/2017 11:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/16/2017 10:50:00 PM (view original):
You really cannot trust the opinions about baseball from somebody who clearly has a low baseball IQ.

Why does BL think he has superior insight into baseball?

Because he's a proponent of advanced stats like WAR.

And he doesn't need to watch the games, because he has the stats.

LOL, you really don’t need advanced stats to see that Hunter wasn’t very good.

You say " . . . to see that Hunter wasn't very good.". Are you old enough to have actually seen him pitch? To have seen how dominant and clutch he was when it really mattered? To remember how every team wanted him when he was a FA?

So I guess Mike Hampton should be in the HOF?

Strawman!

Posted by Jtpsops on 11/17/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
People need to stop pretending they can evaluate the greatness and impact of a player from 30, 50 or 100 years ago better than his contemporaries or those who actually followed his career as it was happening. I trust them far more than I trust any stat geeks trying to retroactively assess his value today.

Your point is that the naked eye test matters. I agree.

Posted by cccp1014 on 11/17/2017 11:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 11/17/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
People need to stop pretending they can evaluate the greatness and impact of a player from 30, 50 or 100 years ago better than his contemporaries or those who actually followed his career as it was happening. I trust them far more than I trust any stat geeks trying to retroactively assess his value today.

Your point is that the naked eye test matters. I agree.

Not just that, but you can't tell everything from a stat sheet. The naked eye test (watching a guy play) is important, but so is knowing his reputation, evaluating intangibles, observing ways he impacts his team beyond his stats.

Posted by cccp1014 on 11/17/2017 11:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 11/17/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
People need to stop pretending they can evaluate the greatness and impact of a player from 30, 50 or 100 years ago better than his contemporaries or those who actually followed his career as it was happening. I trust them far more than I trust any stat geeks trying to retroactively assess his value today.

Your point is that the naked eye test matters. I agree.

Was Babe Ruth good? I guess it's impossible to tell. Oh well.

BL latching on to an extreme example again. What a shock.

I don't think there's much debate on Ruth's value.

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/17/2017 11:22:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 11/17/2017 10:14:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/17/2017 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/17/2017 5:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 11/16/2017 11:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/16/2017 10:50:00 PM (view original):
You really cannot trust the opinions about baseball from somebody who clearly has a low baseball IQ.

Why does BL think he has superior insight into baseball?

Because he's a proponent of advanced stats like WAR.

And he doesn't need to watch the games, because he has the stats.

LOL, you really don’t need advanced stats to see that Hunter wasn’t very good.

You say " . . . to see that Hunter wasn't very good.". Are you old enough to have actually seen him pitch? To have seen how dominant and clutch he was when it really mattered? To remember how every team wanted him when he was a FA?

So I guess Mike Hampton should be in the HOF?

The "every team wanted him when he was a FA" has to be the dumbest ******* argument of all the dumb ******* pro-hunter arguments.

A) He was the only free agent that year. If Marco Estrada was the ONLY available free agent this off-season, lots of teams would want him and he would get a RIDICULOUS contract. And that's now, 40 years later, when teams actually know how to evaluate pitching and don't just sign the guy with the most wins and a reputation for being clutch.

B) Even when there is an actual free agent class with lots of players, guys still get ridiculous contracts. See Mike Hampton. Or Pablo Sandoval. Or pick a name out of a hat.

Posted by tecwrg on 11/17/2017 5:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 11/16/2017 11:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/16/2017 10:50:00 PM (view original):
You really cannot trust the opinions about baseball from somebody who clearly has a low baseball IQ.

Why does BL think he has superior insight into baseball?

Because he's a proponent of advanced stats like WAR.

And he doesn't need to watch the games, because he has the stats.

Do you think BL feels that he is misunderstood? Do you think he tells that to his therapist?

Posted by all3 on 11/17/2017 10:14:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/17/2017 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/17/2017 5:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 11/16/2017 11:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/16/2017 10:50:00 PM (view original):
You really cannot trust the opinions about baseball from somebody who clearly has a low baseball IQ.

Why does BL think he has superior insight into baseball?

Because he's a proponent of advanced stats like WAR.

And he doesn't need to watch the games, because he has the stats.

LOL, you really don’t need advanced stats to see that Hunter wasn’t very good.

You say " . . . to see that Hunter wasn't very good.". Are you old enough to have actually seen him pitch? To have seen how dominant and clutch he was when it really mattered? To remember how every team wanted him when he was a FA?

I'm fairly certain that BL has you blocked as well as me. So I will answer for him. Of course he never saw him pitch and has no context as to what Hunter meant to Major League Baseball while he was a player. So therefore he makes all of his judgments on a bunch of arcane and confusing exotic stats. He's not a fan. He just likes statistics.

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/17/2017 11:22:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 11/17/2017 10:14:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/17/2017 10:03:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/17/2017 5:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 11/16/2017 11:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 11/16/2017 10:50:00 PM (view original):
You really cannot trust the opinions about baseball from somebody who clearly has a low baseball IQ.

Why does BL think he has superior insight into baseball?

Because he's a proponent of advanced stats like WAR.

And he doesn't need to watch the games, because he has the stats.

LOL, you really don’t need advanced stats to see that Hunter wasn’t very good.

You say " . . . to see that Hunter wasn't very good.". Are you old enough to have actually seen him pitch? To have seen how dominant and clutch he was when it really mattered? To remember how every team wanted him when he was a FA?

So I guess Mike Hampton should be in the HOF?

I really don't understand how you make that Corollary.

What is with the redlines?