I'd like to apologize. BL typed in some pretty long and exceptionally stupid explanations in some recent posts. Unfortunately I mistakenly blocked them. And that's a shame because it looks like he spent a lot of time typing them in. He has me blocked but feel free to pass along to him that he could always retype them and I won't block them. **** happens.

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.

This.

And it probably doesn't help that the stat geeks are represented here by BL

Posted by toddcommish on 11/17/2017 1:33:00 PM (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.

This.

And it probably doesn't help that the stat geeks are represented here by BL

No one is pretending anything. We know for a fact that Hunter was not a great pitcher.

Cool story if he gave up runs because his team was way ahead or ate innings to save the bullpen. Neither of those things change the fact that he allowed runs at a league average rate.

"We know..." No, you (think you) know. Players who actually played with/against Hunter and members of the media who followed him at the time say he was one of, if not the best pitcher in the AL during that time. And they did not enjoy facing him.

So regardless of what you think your little statbook tells you, I trust their opinion far more than I will ever trust yours.

Sometimes its not just based on stats. Look at Phil Rizzuto.

Posted by bad_luck on 11/17/2017 1:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 11/17/2017 1:33:00 PM (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.

This.

And it probably doesn't help that the stat geeks are represented here by BL

No one is pretending anything. We know for a fact that Hunter was not a great pitcher.

Cool story if he gave up runs because his team was way ahead or ate innings to save the bullpen. Neither of those things change the fact that he allowed runs at a league average rate.

Once again, moron, it needs to be pointed out that your opinion is not fact.

Posted by sjpoker on 11/17/2017 11:54:00 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.

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

I'm guessing that he tells his therapist that his diagnosis of him is wrong, and that the therapist doesn't understand psychiatry.

Posted by cccp1014 on 11/17/2017 2:10:00 PM (view original):
Sometimes its not just based on stats. Look at Phil Rizzuto.

Guys who come into the HOF via a Committee have to be considered differently than those who are elected in by the BBWAA.

Committee selections (for players) are often suspect, while BBWAA voters generally, but not always, get it right.

Posted by tecwrg on 11/17/2017 2:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/17/2017 1:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 11/17/2017 1:33:00 PM (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.

This.

And it probably doesn't help that the stat geeks are represented here by BL

No one is pretending anything. We know for a fact that Hunter was not a great pitcher.

Cool story if he gave up runs because his team was way ahead or ate innings to save the bullpen. Neither of those things change the fact that he allowed runs at a league average rate.

Once again, moron, it needs to be pointed out that your opinion is not fact.

In this case it’s a fact that Hunter wasn’t a great pitcher.

No. No it's not. But thanks for playing.

BL, your opinion is no fact.

It.

Is.

Not.

I can't use any smaller words than those three.

Is it a fact that Milt Pappas was not a great pitcher?

Nothing is "factual" about greatness. You will get a large consensus that some players are great and some suck, but it just means more people's opinions are in agreement on those particular players. Greatness is always relative.

These are facts:

Catfish Hunter is in the Hall of Fame.
Edgar Martinez is not in the Hall of Fame.

These are opinions:

Catfish Hunter does not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame.
Edgar Martinez does deserve to be in the Hall of Fame.

Do you see how that works? Do you see how your opinions are not facts?