MLB: The 2017 Season

[Olympic Fan]

ESPN is trying to run an on-line poll to pick the second-greatest Yankee of all time (they are conceding first place to the Babe)

As of a few minutes ago, they had Gehrig (31 percent) leading Mantle (25 percent), Jeter (23 percent), DiMaggio (14 percent), Berra and Rivera.

Not bad for an on-line vote. Gehrig is the obvious choice and DiMaggio should be ahead of Jeter (a little recency bias there), but otherwise reasonable.

The Mantle-DiMaggio debate is an interesting one. DiMaggio was a greater defensive CF and a better base-runner (not base-STEALER -- that was rarely done in his era). Mantle has slightly superior offensive numbers. His career was limited by injuries. DiMaggio's career was broken when he lost three seasons in his prime to serve during WWII.

I go back and fourth over the No. 3 and No. 4 Yankees of all-time. Plus, I'd put Berra ahead of Jeter. And a number of pitchers ahead of Rivera. He's the greatest closer in baseball history, but that's a limited role -- guys like Ford and Ruffing had more career value.

[YmoBeThere]

What's the opposite of recency bias?

[brevity]

What's the opposite of recency bias?

Nostalgia.

I've got no love for the Yankees, but I should think a hierarchy of greatest Yankees would be less about stats and performance and more about sentimentality. As in, "I was so glad I got to see ____ play." The default is, and should be, that a long-ago retired player is viewed more favorably than a more recently retired player. One of Derek Jeter's better legacies is the way he has worked his way up that hierarchy, past some of the more vintage players.

[DU82]

ESPN is trying to run an on-line poll to pick the second-greatest Yankee of all time (they are conceding first place to the Babe)

As of a few minutes ago, they had Gehrig (31 percent) leading Mantle (25 percent), Jeter (23 percent), DiMaggio (14 percent), Berra and Rivera.

Not bad for an on-line vote. Gehrig is the obvious choice and DiMaggio should be ahead of Jeter (a little recency bias there), but otherwise reasonable.

The Mantle-DiMaggio debate is an interesting one. DiMaggio was a greater defensive CF and a better base-runner (not base-STEALER -- that was rarely done in his era). Mantle has slightly superior offensive numbers. His career was limited by injuries. DiMaggio's career was broken when he lost three seasons in his prime to serve during WWII.

I go back and forth over the No. 3 and No. 4 Yankees of all-time. Plus, I'd put Berra ahead of Jeter. And a number of pitchers ahead of Rivera. He's the greatest closer in baseball history, but that's a limited role -- guys like Ford and Ruffing had more career value.

I don't think it's that close between Mickey and Joe. Mickey was much better hitting than Joe was on defense. And there's an argument that can be made that Mickey was better on the bases (before the knees went in the '60s). Bill James, in one of his historical abstracts, make a point that you could also argue that Mickey was better on the basepaths than Willie Mays.

Jeter's career value is higher than I thought (58th in WAR) but below DiMaggio (42nd, Mick is 15th; If you credited Joe with the average of the three years before his war service, he'd move up to about 20th.) Yogi is further down (123rd), which is not surprising for catchers.

I think the top six are pretty easy for players who were mostly Yankees, Babe, Lou, Mick, Joe, Yogi and Derek (with only the Babe and Yogi playing for another team, Yogi with all of nine ABs for the Mets in '65.)

On the pitching side, Mariano's WAR is slightly higher than Red's or Whitey's. That's a bit surprising to me (All stats from baseball-reference.com) But Whitey didn't pitch a lot while Casey was managing, instead of a regular rotation, Casey held Whitey for the top teams in the league. Ralph Houk changed that in '61, pitching Whitey every four days, so he had 36-39 starts for five straight years and finally won 20 in a season.

[weezie]

Annoyance! DirecTV MLB Ticket hasn't been working at all since yesterday afternoon. Phooey.

[Olympic Fan]

I don't think it's that close between Mickey and Joe. Mickey was much better hitting than Joe was on defense. And there's an argument that can be made that Mickey was better on the bases (before the knees went in the '60s). Bill James, in one of his historical abstracts, make a point that you could also argue that Mickey was better on the basepaths than Willie Mays.

Jeter's career value is higher than I thought (58th in WAR) but below DiMaggio (42nd, Mick is 15th; If you credited Joe with the average of the three years before his war service, he'd move up to about 20th.) Yogi is further down (123rd), which is not surprising for catchers.

I think the top six are pretty easy for players who were mostly Yankees, Babe, Lou, Mick, Joe, Yogi and Derek (with only the Babe and Yogi playing for another team, Yogi with all of nine ABs for the Mets in '65.)

On the pitching side, Mariano's WAR is slightly higher than Red's or Whitey's. That's a bit surprising to me (All stats from baseball-reference.com) But Whitey didn't pitch a lot while Casey was managing, instead of a regular rotation, Casey held Whitey for the top teams in the league. Ralph Houk changed that in '61, pitching Whitey every four days, so he had 36-39 starts for five straight years and finally won 20 in a season.

I think it's closer than you think. As for baserunning, I wish you would cite where James said Mantle was a better baserunner than Mays ... he did said in the Historical Baseball Abstract that DiMaggio was the best baserunner of his generation -- the fastest player in the game from home to second or first to third (or second to home) ... a player who almost never made a baserunning mistake. I think most historians would give DiMaggio the edge on the bases ... and a significant edge in the field.

Offensively, no question that the Mantle was the more effective of the two, thanks to his high number of walks. Interesting, they both finished with exactly the same OPS -- .977.

I do happen to think Mantle ranks ahead of DiMaggio, but not by much.

I'm not a far of WAR -- just check. Rick Reuschel has a higher WAR than Bob Feller .. ridiculous.

Whitey Ford is underappreciated. His career was better than that of his contemporary, Sandy Koufax (Ford threw significantly more innings, with a better career ERA and a better ERA-plus. He also won significantly more games with a better winning percentage. The wins are team-related, but the ERA is not).

Brevity's comment about nostalgia is interesting -- Bill James talks about how baseball is the only sport where stars tend to gain in stature over the years ... but he cites Yogi Berra as the greatest exception to the rule -- his image as a clown has obscured the fact that he was one of the 2-3 greatest catchers in baseball history.

PS I once did a paper to test the theory that Casey held Whitey out for the roughest foes. I found this:

Between 1953 and 1960 – eight seasons in which the Yankees won six pennants with Ford as their ace – the Hall of Fame lefthander was used by Stengel to pitch against certain teams. Look at the breakdown of his 224 starts in those eight seasons:
Starts against the No. 1 non-Yankee team: 45
Starts against the No. 2 non-Yankee team: 37
Starts against the No. 3 non-Yankee team: 31
Starts against the No. 4 non-Yankee team: 25
Starts against the No. 5 non-Yankee team: 31
Starts against the No. 6 non-Yankee team: 26
Starts against the No. 7 non-Yankee team: 29

Ford did get some patsies in the '50s ... but he clearly got more starts against contenders. That should make his career record better than the numbers suggest.

[DU82]

I think it's closer than you think. As for baserunning, I wish you would cite where James said Mantle was a better baserunner than Mays ... he did said in the Historical Baseball Abstract that DiMaggio was the best baserunner of his generation -- the fastest player in the game from home to second or first to third (or second to home) ... a player who almost never made a baserunning mistake. I think most historians would give DiMaggio the edge on the bases ... and a significant edge in the field.

Offensively, no question that the Mantle was the more effective of the two, thanks to his high number of walks. Interesting, they both finished with exactly the same OPS -- .977.

I do happen to think Mantle ranks ahead of DiMaggio, but not by much.

I'm not a far of WAR -- just check. Rick Reuschel has a higher WAR than Bob Feller .. ridiculous.

Whitey Ford is underappreciated. His career was better than that of his contemporary, Sandy Koufax (Ford threw significantly more innings, with a better career ERA and a better ERA-plus. He also won significantly more games with a better winning percentage. The wins are team-related, but the ERA is not).

Brevity's comment about nostalgia is interesting -- Bill James talks about how baseball is the only sport where stars tend to gain in stature over the years ... but he cites Yogi Berra as the greatest exception to the rule -- his image as a clown has obscured the fact that he was one of the 2-3 greatest catchers in baseball history.

PS I once did a paper to test the theory that Casey held Whitey out for the roughest foes. I found this:

Between 1953 and 1960 – eight seasons in which the Yankees won six pennants with Ford as their ace – the Hall of Fame lefthander was used by Stengel to pitch against certain teams. Look at the breakdown of his 224 starts in those eight seasons:
Starts against the No. 1 non-Yankee team: 45
Starts against the No. 2 non-Yankee team: 37
Starts against the No. 3 non-Yankee team: 31
Starts against the No. 4 non-Yankee team: 25
Starts against the No. 5 non-Yankee team: 31
Starts against the No. 6 non-Yankee team: 26
Starts against the No. 7 non-Yankee team: 29

Ford did get some patsies in the '50s ... but he clearly got more starts against contenders. That should make his career record better than the numbers suggest.

I think it was in the ~2000 historical abstract, I'll check when I get home.

Regarding WAR, I was using it as one measurement to indicate that rating Rivera over Ford wasn't as absurd as first thought. But using it in general terms highlights some players who otherwise wouldn't get their due. Such as Reuschel. Would I pick him over Ford? Very doubtful. But he was an outstanding pitcher (outstanding as opposed to HOF level.). I did notice after I posted that baseball-reference.com used a slightly different WAR on their team page to rank all-time best players (not including only including the value earned while with that specific team.)

And we agree on Ford's value. Thanks for the additional research.

[Olympic Fan]

Watching Kershaw beat the Diamondbacks last night, I thought about Whitey Ford ...

Ford finished his career with a 2.75 career ERA. That's he lowest for any starting pitcher since the deadball era ended (1920).

But Kershaw's career ERA at the moment is 2.37 -- significantly better.

Of course, Kershaw has pitched just 1,781 innings, significantly less than Ford's 3,170.

He's got a long way to go and his career number is likely to rise a bit as he approaches the end of his career.

Still, two things: (1) Understand we are seeing possibly the greatest starting pitcher in the modern era in his prime; (2) his quest to better Ford's career ERA is something to watch. The longer he can sustain his performance at this level, the more of a cushion he builds in to withstand his likely decline as he nears the end of his career.

[DU82]

I think it's closer than you think. As for baserunning, I wish you would cite where James said Mantle was a better baserunner than Mays ... he did said in the Historical Baseball Abstract that DiMaggio was the best baserunner of his generation -- the fastest player in the game from home to second or first to third (or second to home) ... a player who almost never made a baserunning mistake. I think most historians would give DiMaggio the edge on the bases ... and a significant edge in the field.

Revised and updated original edition, from 1988 (page 404). The argument was who had more peak value, Mickey or Mays.. In that edition, James divided the rankings into best peak value and top career value (even though he changed his ranking methodology in the 2000 edition, I still think the peak vs. career separation makes sense):

Baserunning:
There are two measurable indicators of baserunning ability - stolen base percentage, and the frequency of grounding into doubles. In both respects, Mantle is superior...(cites statistics)...There is no reasonable basis for giving Mays a bonus as a baserunner.

Now, thirty years later, there's additional measures of comparison beyond the relatively common stats available then. But I think the argument about Mantle being superior to Mays (and Cobb) on a peak value standpoint holds up.

Regarding Joe, he wasn't even the best fielder in his family.

We're talking about four of the five top CFers in history here (add Tris Speaker, arguments for Griffey and Snider; Mike Trout will likely join them if he keeps up his play) so there's not a lot to separate them. But I think there's enough to put Mickey on the top of the list of center fielders for peak performance.

[mr. synellinden]

Watching Kershaw beat the Diamondbacks last night, I thought about Whitey Ford ...

Ford finished his career with a 2.75 career ERA. That's he lowest for any starting pitcher since the deadball era ended (1920).

But Kershaw's career ERA at the moment is 2.37 -- significantly better.

Of course, Kershaw has pitched just 1,781 innings, significantly less than Ford's 3,170.

He's got a long way to go and his career number is likely to rise a bit as he approaches the end of his career.

Still, two things: (1) Understand we are seeing possibly the greatest starting pitcher in the modern era in his prime; (2) his quest to better Ford's career ERA is something to watch. The longer he can sustain his performance at this level, the more of a cushion he builds in to withstand his likely decline as he nears the end of his career.

He is making the case for greatest starting pitcher in the modern era.
We unfortunately were robbed of a full Kershaw in his prime season last year when Kershaw was on pace to post the lowest season WHIP of all time with a WHIP of .72 over 21 starts and an ERA of 1.69. He had a total of 11 walks all year last year. Carlos Martinez had almost that many today in 5 innings. Pedro holds the WHIP record at .73. I hope Kershaw stays healthy all season because I think this is his peak season (age 29) and we could see historic stats and domination on the level of Pedro, Maddux, and Clemens.

[Olympic Fan]

Revised and updated original edition, from 1988 (page 404). The argument was who had more peak value, Mickey or Mays.. In that edition, James divided the rankings into best peak value and top career value (even though he changed his ranking methodology in the 2000 edition, I still think the peak vs. career separation makes sense):

Baserunning:
There are two measurable indicators of baserunning ability - stolen base percentage, and the frequency of grounding into doubles. In both respects, Mantle is superior...(cites statistics)...There is no reasonable basis for giving Mays a bonus as a baserunner.

Now, thirty years later, there's additional measures of comparison beyond the relatively common stats available then. But I think the argument about Mantle being superior to Mays (and Cobb) on a peak value standpoint holds up.

Regarding Joe, he wasn't even the best fielder in his family.

We're talking about four of the five top CFers in history here (add Tris Speaker, arguments for Griffey and Snider; Mike Trout will likely join them if he keeps up his play) so there's not a lot to separate them. But I think there's enough to put Mickey on the top of the list of center fielders for peak performance.

I enjoy this kind of debate ... and I remind you that I do rate Mantle over DiMaggio. I'm just arguing that the gap between them is not that much.

It's obvious we both have a healthy respect for Bill James' research. I remind you that while he does rate Mantle the No. 1 centerfielder in history by peak value (DiMaggio is No. 4), he rated DiMaggio ahead of Mantle for career value (DiMaggio No. 2; Mantle No. 5). Page 397 of the 1986 Historical Baseball Abstract. Overall, in peak value he has Mantle at No. 3 (behind Ruth and Wagner), Mays at No. 12 and DiMaggio at No. 14. In terms of career value, he had DiMaggio at No. 8, Mays at No. 9 and Mantle at No. 19. Berra actually shows up at No. 16 in career value -- ahead of Mantle.

As for DiMaggio's baserunning abilities, James says in his original abstract:

True, he didn't steal bases. In his career, he stole 30 in 39 attempts. Yet, there seems to be no reasonable doubt that had he played in the game of the sixties, the seventies or the teens, he could have stolen about as many bases as anybody.

James goes on to argue that DiMaggio probably suffered more from his home ballpark (the Death Valley in left-center was particularly cruel to a righthanded pull hitter) and his era (which diminished his running ability and stole three years from the prime on his career). James said, "As great as DiMaggio was, he likely would have been greater at any other time and almost any other place."

I know you were just joking about DiMaggio not being the best fielder in his family. It's true that all three DiMaggio players were extraordinary defensive centerfielders. In one of his yearly abstracts. James addresses this issue, awarding outfield Gold Gloves (in the 30s and 40s when there were no official gold gloves). It's amazing how many he thinks the three brothers would have won. If I remember correctly (I have to go through my back issues), he does conclude that Dom was superior defensively to Joe -- but he also has Joe winning a gold glove in every season he was healthy. Joe's defensive reputation was not a fiction, created by New York sports writers. He WAS a great defensive CFer.

[rasputin]

Revised and updated original edition, from 1988 (page 404). The argument was who had more peak value, Mickey or Mays.. In that edition, James divided the rankings into best peak value and top career value (even though he changed his ranking methodology in the 2000 edition, I still think the peak vs. career separation makes sense):

Baserunning:
There are two measurable indicators of baserunning ability - stolen base percentage, and the frequency of grounding into doubles. In both respects, Mantle is superior...(cites statistics)...There is no reasonable basis for giving Mays a bonus as a baserunner.

Now, thirty years later, there's additional measures of comparison beyond the relatively common stats available then. But I think the argument about Mantle being superior to Mays (and Cobb) on a peak value standpoint holds up.

Regarding Joe, he wasn't even the best fielder in his family.

We're talking about four of the five top CFers in history here (add Tris Speaker, arguments for Griffey and Snider; Mike Trout will likely join them if he keeps up his play) so there's not a lot to separate them. But I think there's enough to put Mickey on the top of the list of center fielders for peak performance.

This is hard to quantify, but Oscar Charleston belongs in the conversation.

[DU82]

This is hard to quantify, but Oscar Charleston belongs in the conversation.

You're right, I should have qualified it as MLB players. Bill James didn't include Negro League players in his first abstract's listings from the '80s, but included them in the second ones (2001.)

[Olympic Fan]

You're right, I should have qualified it as MLB players. Bill James didn't include Negro League players in his first abstract's listings from the '80s, but included them in the second ones (2001.)

The great stars of the Negro Leagues are the great wild card in any debate as to the greatest players of all time.

Is Bench or Gibson the greatest catcher ever? How about John Henry Lloyd vs. Honus Wagner at short? Where does Satchel Paige fit in the all-time pitcher rankings? Buck Leonard at first base ... Ray Dandridge or Judy Johnson at third ... Martin Dihago ranks with Ruth are the greatest pitcher/everyday player.

Bill James ranked Oscar Charleston as the greatest Negro League outfielder ... and player. But he admitted that he's just guessing as to the relative rank of the Negro League stars.

Unfortunately, we can only guess at where they should be in any ranking. But the relative success of the black players who were allowed to play big league ball is -- to my mind at least -- pretty good evidence that the Negro League stars of the '20s and '30s were as good as their white contemporaries.

[weezie]

Sterling Marte, sad, smh...

[Olympic Fan]

Sterling Marte, sad, smh...

The Pirates are my favorite NL team ... but I have no sympathy for cheaters.

I'm actually happy that this allows McCutchen to return to centerfield, where he belongs.

[rasputin]

The Pirates are my favorite NL team ... but I have no sympathy for cheaters.

I'm actually happy that this allows McCutchen to return to centerfield, where he belongs.

The Cardinals' broadcasters in the recent series were commenting on some metric purporting to show that McCutchen is a terrible outfielder, and they questioned the metric. During the span of the discussion he flagged down a couple of balls in the gap, both very good plays.

[Olympic Fan]

The Cardinals' broadcasters in the recent series were commenting on some metric purporting to show that McCutchen is a terrible outfielder, and they questioned the metric. During the span of the discussion he flagged down a couple of balls in the gap, both very good plays.

I have a lot of questions about defensive metrics a they are now constituted. Billy Ripkin had an interesting examination of those metrics recently on the MLB Network. Basically, he pointed out that in the last two years, outfielders are wildly overrated for runs saved. He pointed out that outfielders average about half as many chances as infielders, yet on the whole are credited with twice as many runs saved.

I do think McCutchen had an off year last season (which may have been caused by him playing through some injuries), but he was an MVP level player in the previous four seasons ... and he just turned 30. I think it's way too early to give up on him (as the Pirates tried to do in the offseason).

BTW: Did anybody else see what happened late last night in Seattle? Ichiro pinch hit for the Marlins in the ninth -- probably his last AB in Seattle -- and clubbed a homer run to right. A magic moment made more magic by the fact that Seattle was way ahead, so the Seattle fans could cheer their former hero without conflict.

[CDu]

I have a lot of questions about defensive metrics a they are now constituted. Billy Ripkin had an interesting examination of those metrics recently on the MLB Network. Basically, he pointed out that in the last two years, outfielders are wildly overrated for runs saved. He pointed out that outfielders average about half as many chances as infielders, yet on the whole are credited with twice as many runs saved.

I do think McCutchen had an off year last season (which may have been caused by him playing through some injuries), but he was an MVP level player in the previous four seasons ... and he just turned 30. I think it's way too early to give up on him (as the Pirates tried to do in the offseason).

BTW: Did anybody else see what happened late last night in Seattle? Ichiro pinch hit for the Marlins in the ninth -- probably his last AB in Seattle -- and clubbed a homer run to right. A magic moment made more magic by the fact that Seattle was way ahead, so the Seattle fans could cheer their former hero without conflict.

McCutchen has been a bad defensive OF in CF for 3 straight years now, and for 5 of his last 7. That is based on pretty much all of the various defensive metrics, not just one. Empirically, he really shouldn't be in CF. I do hope he regains his swing after a mediocre 2016, because he was one of the game's absolute best offensive players and seems to be a genuinely good guy.. But he really should be a corner OF.

[FadedTackyShirt]

McCutchen has been a bad defensive OF in CF for 3 straight years now, and for 5 of his last 7. That is based on pretty much all of the various defensive metrics, not just one. Empirically, he really shouldn't be in CF. I do hope he regains his swing after a mediocre 2016, because he was one of the game's absolute best offensive players and seems to be a genuinely good guy.. But he really should be a corner OF.

Depends on where they are at the trade deadline, but a Giants/Pirates trade for McCuthchen may make sense if Giants are close to contending.

Lost starting left fielder Jarrett Parker for at least half the season and already lack outfield depth. Pence and Spann are near the end and the young Giants minor league outfielders aren't ready. A year and a half of McCutchen in left would buy them some time. Ryan Braun might work, but the Giants don't need/want a bad contract.

Promising young set up man Derek Law grew up in Pittsburgh. McCutchen has another year left before free agency. Giants clock is ticking and they can't afford to trade away projected future starters Arroyo and Beede since they've already cannibalized their farm system to stay in the hunt over the last seven seasons. Pain involved for both sides...