MLB 2008-09 Hot Stove League

[Leo]

Sure. There were lesser players then. But the handful of greats today were armfuls yesterday.

 

I don't think that today's all-stars, with obvious exceptions (Pujols), would put up the numbers they currently produce against pre-expansion pitching and fielding. Not to mention ballparks and mound. It's a tired conversation; but it does tend to diffuse the frustration that comes with all the Money In Baseball talk that takes place this time of year.

[MrRain422]

In this hypothetical, do today's players still get modern exercise techniques, nutritional knowledge, etc.? 'Cause if they do, I think they'd dominate baseball of that era.

[Leo]

In this hypothetical, do today's players still get modern exercise techniques, nutritional knowledge, etc.? 'Cause if they do, I think they'd dominate baseball of that era.

Fair enough. But do those advantages make them better baseball players? Or better trained athletes?

 

I really don't think they'd dominate. Baseball is more about skill than athleticism. Michael Jordan?

[bobbob1313]

A handful of players dominating a league is a sign that that league is watered down with lesser competition. booyah.

 

And I could make a list of players from the last 25 years that are as good as those, but you'd just disagree with it anyways.

[bobbob1313]

I'm bored so:

 

Comparable players of the last 25 years:

 

Koufax - Pedro Martinez

Gibson - Curt Schilling

Bench - Piazza/I-Rod (Piazza's a better hitter, I-Rod is at least his equal defensively)

McCovey - Jim Thome, or Lance Berkman, or Chipper Jones, or Frank Thomas, or Carlos Delgado, or any other number of big hitting corner infielders

Rose - Tony Gwynn

Banks - Cal Ripken

Schmidt - Alex Rodriguez

Aaron - Barry Bonds

Mays - Ken Griffey Jr

Clemente - Ichiro (in 4,000 less PA)

 

I don't think there's any question in mind that the quality of play in Major League Baseball has consistently risen from day one. It has to. That's the nature of sports. In every other form of competition, records have been broken consistently as time has moved forward. Are we to believe that baseball is alone in athletics as the only sport that has actually moved backwards?

 

I'm not saying those players weren't great or wouldn't be great today, but the game is a lot different and a lot more competitive now than it was back then, and a lot of that is the result of money. If you want to say that "cheapens" the game, that's fine, but I don't see how an argument can be made that due to the higher stakes and greater financial reward for success, players don't work harder to try to improve than they did in year's past.

 

In the last 25 years, we've seen probably 3 of the top 10 hitters ever (Bonds, A-Rod, Pujols) and 4 of the 10 best pitchers ever (Maddux, Pedro, Clemens, Unit) enter the league. We've also had the 2nd greatest speed/power guy ever (Rickey Henderson; Bonds is #1), one of the two or three best switch hitters ever (Chipper), and some of the best power hitters in league history.

 

And that's not even getting into the absolute domination by players of latin origin in that same time period, and the influx of talented players from other parts of the world (Asia, specifically) who wouldn't have been able to play during the "golden age" of the game. Sure, there were hispanic players back then, but they weren't fully integrated into the game like they are now. Any time a new pool of talent opens up (as latin America has), it increases the overall level of play.

 

Of course, the argument can be made that since there are more teams, the talent pool is spread out more, but I don't necessarily agree. Because as expansion has taken place, it has evened out because of the aforementioned increase in the talent pool from Latin America and the rest of the world.

 

And players play longer now, and are less susceptible to career ending injuries. If Sandy Koufax pitched now, he wouldn't have been done by the age of 30, because of modern medical advances. And I know a lot of proponents of the "golden age" think that today's numbers are dilluted because of steroids and small ballparks, which have cheapened offensive statistics, but the same can be said of the pitchers in the 60's, especially Gibson and Koufax, whose numbers seem a little less ridiculous in context. And just as hitters in the 60's were hurt by an offensively challened environment, pitchers in the modern era face an uphill battle to succeed thanks to the offensive explosion that has been mostly beyond their control. It's the reason why Bob Gibson's 2.91 ERA is essentially the same as 3.46 ERA when you adjust for context, as the league ERA when Gibson played was .7 runs lower than when Schilling did.

 

And on that note, I have to note that it's not really fair to compare players from different eras anyways; at least not if you are using counting stats like RBI, HR, BA, ERA, and Wins, which ignore things like era and ballpark. To truly compare players from different eras, you have to use stats like ERA+, OPS+, or WARP3 (Wins Above Replacement Player) that take into account the ballpark and era a player played in. WARP3 even takes defense into account. So let's compare our two lists using career WARP3 (Pitchers excluded):

 

Bench 120.5 - Piazza 98.3 / I-Rod 140.4

McCovey 112.7 - Jim Thome 111, or Lance Berkman 74.7 (at age 32), or Chipper Jones 100.9, or Frank Thomas 134.9, or Carlos Delgado 94.1

Rose 155 - Tony Gwynn 122

Banks 119 - Cal Ripken 173

Schmidt 157 - Alex Rodriguez 141 (7 years younger than Schmidt's final season)

Aaron 217 - Barry Bonds 236

Mays 220 - Ken Griffey Jr 139

Clemente 127 - Ichiro 73 (in 4,000 less PA)

 

I know my statistically based ramblings tend to fall on deaf ears here, and I don't expect that to be any different this time around, but my basic point is this:

 

Thanks mainly to advances in science and health, and a plethora of talent from a heretofore mostly untapped source, the baseball played today is at least as good (and probably far better) than the baseball played 40-50-60 years ago.

 

And here's a Bill James quote, just for fun:

 

1). Hitting by Pitchers

2). The average distance of the players, in age, from 27

3). The percentage of players who are less than six feet tall or more than 6’3”

4). Fielding percentage and Passed balls

5). Double Plays

6). Usage of pitchers at other positions

7). The percentage of fielding plays made by pitchers

8). The percentage of games which are blowouts

9). The average attendance and seating capacity of the games location

10). The condition of the field

11). The use of players in specialized roles

12). The average distance of teams from .500

13). The percentage of games which go nine innings.

14). The standard deviation of offensive effectiveness

15). The standard of record-keeping

16). The percentage of managers who have 20 years or more experience in the game.

 

“Anyway, my point is that if you track major league baseball from 1876 to the present, all of these indicia, without exception, have advanced steadily. As late as the 1920’s, there were still major league managers who had little experience with the game. I know that many people passionately disagree with me when I argue that the quality of play in the majors has continued to increase, but even since 1950, all or virtually all these indicators would suggest that the quality of major league plays has improved steadily:

 

The best-hitting pitchers of the 21st century don’t hit anything like what bob Lemon hit, or Spahn, or Newcombe, or the other good-hitting pitchers of that era.

 

Success in the majors by very young players has become significantly less common (although success by old players has probably become more common).

 

In 1950 major league pitchers averaged about 240 assists per team; in 2001, in a longer season, the average will be less than 200.

 

In 1950 there were about 1.2 double plays for each error. In 2001 the ratio will be at least 1.3 to one.

 

Player-managers, who were the youngest and least experienced managers, have become extinct.

 

The stadiums and crowds are bigger, the statistics are better, the grounds keeping standards are far higher. The teams are closer to .500. I haven’t studied it, bit I would be there are fewer blowouts, fewer lop-sided games.”

 

Also, another quote from Bill James about something that might further tip the balance in favore of modern players once it's all said and done:

 

There is no doubt that there is an unusual amount of great young talent around right now. Arguably, there is more outstanding young talent around right now than at any other moment in baseball history -- not more per team, but there are more teams. The moment at which there had been the most young talent in baseball, before 2007, was 1964. Among the players in 1964 who were 25 years old or younger and already doing some good work in The Show: Dick Allen, Ken Berry, Jim Bouton, Lou Brock, Gates Brown, Wally Bunker, Johnny Callison, Rico Carty, Dean Chance, Tony Conigliaro, Willie Davis, Larry Dierker, Al Downing, Sammy Ellis, Dick Ellsworth, Ron Fairly, Bill Freehan, Jim Fregosi, Dave Giusti, Dick Green, Jim Ray Hart, Alex Johnson, Deron Johnson, Jim Kaat, Mickey Lolich, Jim Maloney, Dick McAuliffe, Tim McCarver, Sam McDowell, Dave McNally, Tony Oliva, Claude Osteen, Milt Pappas, Gaylord Perry, Vada Pinson, Boog Powell, Pete Rose, Ray Sadecki, Ron Santo, Willie Stargell, Mel Stottlemyre, Luis Tiant, Joe Torre, Pete Ward, Don Wert, Zoilo Versalles and Carl Yastrzemski. That was greatest explosion of young talent in baseball history -- until now.

 

The last two are just a couple of things to chew on.

[MrRain422]

Schilling is nowhere near as good as Gibson. Otherwise great post -- and yes, the expansion of the pool of potential players from "white American guys plus a few random hispanic players" to "everybody" more than more cancels out league expansion.

[Lammycat]

Teixeira announcement to come today...?

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/reds...as/extra_bases/

[Leo]

A handful of players dominating a league is a sign that that league is watered down with lesser competition. booyah.

 

And I could make a list of players from the last 25 years that are as good as those, but you'd just disagree with it anyways.

Earl!!

 

That's not true. I almost always agree with your positions (except The Hold Steady - overrated), especially when it comes to baseball. You are thoughtful and passionate and well spoken (written).

 

And, in this instance, well researched. I can't and won't argue with any of it. I'd still rather field my lineup than yours. And I do agree with Matt that much of my opinion comes from the romance I had with baseball when I was a kid. Don't get me wrong though, I admire the players on your list and am grateful we have the opportunity to watch them chase baseball's ghosts (because the magic is in the continuum, of course, which is held together by your numbers). Hell, I spend at least at least 40 nights each summer at a MLB ballpark doing just that.

 

And thanks for the James. If nothing else, these are some of the greatest baseball-type names ever:

 

Gates Brown, Wally Bunker, Rico Carty, Dean Chance, Tony Conigliaro, Ron Fairly, Jim Fregosi, Dave Giusti, Mickey Lolich, Dick McAuliffe, Sam McDowell, Tony Oliva, Claude Osteen, Milt Pappas, Gaylord Perry, Vada Pinson, Boog Powell, Pete Rose, Ray Sadecki, Ron Santo, Willie Stargell, Mel Stottlemyre, Luis Tiant, Joe Torre, Pete Ward, Don Wert, Zoilo Versalles and Carl Yastrzemski.

 

Say 'em out loud - it's poetry.

[jenbobblehead]

Teixeira announcement to come today...?

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/reds...as/extra_bases/

I am so freaking shaking.

[bobbob1313]

Schilling is nowhere near as good as Gibson. Otherwise great post -- and yes, the expansion of the pool of potential players from "white American guys plus a few random hispanic players" to "everybody" more than more cancels out league expansion.

 

I mean, probably not. But check the numbers. It's not as ridiculous a comparison as it first seems.

[PigSooie]

.

 

But at a little past 2 p.m., Sports Illustrated.com's Jon Heyman wrote the following on the site's Hot Stove News Tracker:

 

The Yankees are in deep discussions with Teixeira, in what is now an attempt to beat out the rival Red Sox for Teixeira's services. The Teixeira sweepstakes is considered to be a three-team battle with the Nationals still involved. However, the Yankees' talks have turned serious in recent hours, as the team appears to be stepping up its attempts to lure the free-agent slugger to New York.

[PigSooie]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/base...eira/index.html

 

 

Yankees reach agreement with Teixeira on 8-year, $180M deal

 

By Jon Heyman, SI.com

Decrease font Decrease font

Enlarge font Enlarge font

ADVERTISEMENT

 

The Yankees have reached an agreement in principle to sign Mark Teixeira, SI.com has learned, beating out the rival Red Sox for the free-agent slugger's services.

 

Teixeira, who hit .308 with 33 home runs and 121 RBIs in 2008, will receive an eight-year, $180 million deal from the Yankees with a full no-trade provision.

 

The final four teams in the race to sign Teixeira were the Red Sox, Angels, Nationals and Yankees.

 

The Yankees remained in quietly contact with the Teixeira camp, but after spending $243.5 million on star starting pitchers CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett, they didn't appear anxious to be the market setter.

 

The Red Sox threw a curveball late last week when owner John Henry announced they were no longer "going to be a factor'' following a meeting at Teixeira's Dallas-area house. But after a little while, it became clear that Henry only meant that they intended not to up their bid, not that they were pulling out of the derby entirely.

 

While Henry's team remained in the running, Angels owner Arte Moreno pulled out for real on Sunday, announcing they had given up the chase. Moreno had submitted a proposal believed to be for $160 million at the Winter Meetings and hadn't moved from that initial offer.

 

While there were rumors that the Severna Park, Md., product preferred to be on the East Coast, there never was any real evidence of that. He loved his time in Anaheim and continued to live in the Dallas area, so those suggestions may have been overplayed.

[cryptique]

I can't wait for the Yankees to miss the playoffs despite their gargantuan payroll.

[CrushOfVeils80]

unless they have a bunch of injuries I would say the Yanks will make the playoffs, at least the wild card, I think Boston might still be better though 1-25

[PigSooie]

BOS is going to have to have production out of Ortiz and Lowell this year to compete.

[CrushOfVeils80]

Papi will rebound I think, not sure about Lowell

[mfwahl]

And the Yankees are supposedly close to a deal with Manny. If they don't make the playoffs, it will be incredibly embarrassing.

[rareair]

time for the red sox to forgive and forget.

 

bring manny home for Christmas.

[CrushOfVeils80]

would they just DH Manny then...they also have Matsui and Damon still...and what about Swisher now that they signed Tex? good lord

[PigSooie]

And the Yankees are supposedly close to a deal with Manny. If they don't make the playoffs, it will be incredibly embarrassing.

 

 

They can't sign Manny now can they? He's a type A free agent. Teixeira was their 3rd type A signed.

 

 

Edit: This may not be right. I think more than 62 players filed for free agency this year.

[MattZ]

Fuck the Yankees.

[PigSooie]

Fuck the Yankees.

 

This.

[CrushOfVeils80]

Fuck the Yankees.

 

 

agreed

[Guest Jules]

[mfwahl]

They can't sign Manny now can they? He's a type A free agent. Teixeira was their 3rd type A signed.

 

 

Edit: This may not be right. I think more than 62 players filed for free agency this year.

I don't know the rules perfectly, but can't they sign more by releasing type a free agents (Abreu, pettite?)?