A Case for Barry
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 10:00 AM EDT
in History/Hall of Fame
135 comments
With the regular season over, we're starting to see an uptick in discussion of Barry Larkin's case for the Hall of Fame (like this one by the Reds), as this is his first year of eligibility. I've written about this a bit before, but now that we have access to Rally's WAR data for 1871-2008 (and soon 2009 after Retrosheet updates), I thought I'd take a look at Larkin's case for the Hall of Fame using those data.
Below the jump are career stat breakdowns for Larkin plus the 10 shortstops elected into the Hall of Fame by the BBWAA. There are another 12 elected by the Veterans' committee, but a) their standards tend to be lower than those of the BBWAA (yes, despite Jim Rice), and b) we're working with the BBWAA process right now so we'll stick to those players. I'm also omitting active players who will likely go to the Hall (Jeter, ARod), as well as retired players who may be deserving but are not in yet (e.g. Alan Trammell).
Click below to see the table and graph!
| Name | Debut | Seasons | PA | WAR | WAR/700PA | BtRuns | wOBA | FldRuns | Fld/700PA | PosAdj |
| Aparicio, Luis | 1956 | 18 | 10993 | 49.9 | 3.2 | -112 | 0.323 | 149 | 9 | 164 |
| Appling, Luke | 1930 | 20 | 10169 | 69.3 | 4.8 | 218 | 0.36 | 41 | 3 | 145 |
| Banks, Ernie | 1953 | 19 | 10254 | 64.4 | 4.4 | 235 | 0.361 | 54 | 9 | -9 |
| Boudreau, Lou | 1938 | 15 | 6859 | 56 | 5.7 | 161 | 0.362 | 118 | 12 | 99 |
| Cronin, Joe | 1926 | 20 | 8672 | 62.5 | 5 | 233 | 0.366 | 28 | 2 | 117 |
| Larkin, Barry | 1986 | 19 | 8931 | 68.9 | 5.4 | 280 | 0.371 | 27 | 2 | 114 |
| Maranville, Rabbit | 1912 | 23 | 10956 | 38.2 | 2.4 | -219 | 0.312 | 130 | 8 | 158 |
| Ripken, Cal | 1981 | 21 | 12746 | 89.9 | 4.9 | 161 | 0.35 | 181 | 10 | 143 |
| Smith, Ozzie | 1978 | 19 | 10501 | 64.6 | 4.3 | -47 | 0.33 | 239 | 16 | 147 |
| Wagner, Honus | 1897 | 21 | 11518 | 134.5 | 8.2 | 744 | 0.409 | 85 | 5 | 104 |
| Yount, Robin | 1974 | 20 | 12022 | 76.9 | 4.5 | 344 | 0.368 | -47 | -3 | 81 |
Glossary: WAR = Wins Above Replacement, a measure of total career value; WAR/700PA is WAR converted into a rate statistic, or WAR per full player season; BtRuns = batted runs above average, including all offensive events including detailed baserunning; wOBA = weight on-base average, a rate stat based on BtRuns, uses the same scale as OBP; FldRuns = Fielding runs saved above average, based on TotalZone or JAARF; Fld/700PA = FldRuns converted to a rate stat; PosAdj = position adjustment accounting for fielding quality differences among positions.
The table is sortable if you click in the header. In fact, click on "WAR/700PA." This is wins above replacement, expressed as a rate stat (700 PA is ~1 full player season). Among these shortstops (again, Larkin + HoF'ers), Barry ranks 3rd. Obviously, Honus Wagner was ridiculus. But Larkin nests with Lou Boudreau in the second tier, which is followed by a close grouping of Joe Cronin, Cal Ripken, and Luke Appling as a third tier. You see similar outstanding rates when you look at wOBA, an all-encompassing offensive rate stat (already adjusted for era), in which Larkin ranks 2nd in this very select group. When healthy, Barry was as good as they come offensively (Wagners excluded).
The knocks on Larkin, however, mostly have to do with playing time, not rate stats: Larkin ranks ahead of only Joe Cronin and Lou Boudreau in PA's, and struggled with injuries periodically throughout his career. So from that perpsective, it may be that counting stats, rather than rate stats, are the best way to judge Larkin's career. Let's start by clicking on WAR. Despite his limited playing time, Larkin ranks 5th in total value above replacement. That's ahead of Ozzie Smith and ahead of Ernie Banks. In other words, his total career accumulated value is above replacement level is better than the average Hall of Fame shortstop!
Really, no matter how you slice it, Larkin matches up favorably to these Hall of Famers by his career numbers. Don't like Replacement as a baseline when judging your Hall of Famers? Larkin ranks third in total accumulated runs above average (not shown--but just sum up BtRuns, FldRuns, and PosAdj), behind only Wagner and Ripken. Don't trust the fielding metrics used in WAR and only want to look at offense? Larkin ranks third in BtRuns above average. The only way in which Larkin does not match up as well is his fielding numbers, which are above-average but not as brilliant as most of the other shortstops listed here (equal to Cronin, ahead of Yount and Banks once you account for position). The net effect of his production, though, as measured by WAR, is still enough to rank him as an above-average hall of fame shortstop.
What about season-by-season performance? Here is a WAR graph showing Larkin, plus the two guys above and below him among our elite sample of players (Young, Appling, Ozzie, and Mr. Cub):
Yount was clearly better. Good, consistent career, with a fantastic peak (his 1982 season was other-worldly given the run environment at the time). Banks is an interesting case in that he had a fantabulous peak but was essentially league average or worse outside of his 6-7 best seasons.
But I think the Appling-Smith-Larkin comp is pretty interesting. Appling had a slightly better peak, while Larkin had better longevity. Larkin was generally superior (marginally) to Smith across the board. I'm guessing that most people don't know much about Appling--I certainly didn't--but he was elected by a sizable margin (84%). And you won't find many people who will argue that Ozzie Smith doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. Larkin matches up extremely well to those players, which represent something like the average Hall of Fame shortstop.
The final thing to take away from that figure is where Larkin fits with respect to the HoF zone. The top of that zone is the average Hall of Famer's career line on a WAR graph like the one above. The bottom of that zone is roughly the 20th percentile of HoF'ers, sometimes referred to as the "replacement hall of fame" line. Larkin is comfortably within--and sometimes over--the top of that zone every year of his career. This confirms what the Appling & Smith comparisons tell us--he had comparable careers to those guys, who are fairly average Hall of Fame players (i.e. they were superb players).
Overall, I think the data are clear: Larkin should be in the Hall of Fame. By rate stats, he's clearly deserving. By counting stats, at least in terms of total value, he's clearly deserving. I hope the baseball writers get this one right.
5 recs |
135 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
Great stuff
I always wanted Larkin in the Hall for silly personal reasons (he’s my favorite player of all-time, he won a World Series and MVP, he played his whole career for one team, etc.) so it’s great to see that the stats are there to back up all my schoolboy stargazing feelings.
by Brendanukkah on Oct 23, 2009 10:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the whole "played entirely for one team" card
is going to be played…that’s really something for the sentimental old farts of writers. It just isn’t done that much anymore. I could imagine lots of “Barry was a throwback” articles when he gets elected, even if that’ll take a year or two
"And then there was the USAID guy in Kandahar who drove a giant pink Cadillac, which the locals set on fire one day. If you wanted to destroy something symbolic during a riot, you just could not do better than that. Good stuff." - Ghosts of Alexander
by Cy Schourek on Oct 23, 2009 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Larkin will be elected, maybe not the firstor second ballot but he'll get in.
Too bad for Davey…the best SS of his time…he shold be in too…esp. if Jim Rice is in.
Jay Bruce will become a major league baseball STAR, starting in April, 2010.....
by Madville on Oct 23, 2009 10:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Concepcion's case is a lot harder to make statistically
Part of it is that the fielding stats that work for his era don’t show him as outstanding as a lot of folks remember him being (Ozzie and Belanger show up as heads and tails above him, for example).
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Folks were much drunker back those days.
Seeing Davey go deep into the hole and send a one hop sizzler to get the batter by 1/2 step was incredible.
Jay Bruce will become a major league baseball STAR, starting in April, 2010.....
by Madville on Oct 23, 2009 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I beg to differ kind sir
I think my drunkenness can stand up against that of any generation.
"What the hell are spanks????"
by jch24 on Oct 23, 2009 7:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm A Lifelong Diehard Concepcion Fan...
….but I don’t think he’s going to get in. Had the steroids era and Cal Ripken not happened, he might have an argument (even then he would’ve been borderline), but those things did happen, and Davey’s hitting numbers aren’t there. Plus, Larkin followed Concepcion, and as much as I loved watching Dave play growing up, admittedly, Barry was better, as a hitter and arguably as a fielder. And I think Larkin will get in. He might not be a first ballot HOFer, although I think he should be, since his overall numbers were probably held back by some injuries and a late career fade, but he’ll get in. My God, if they let someone like Jim Rice in the HOF, who has no business in Cooperstown, Larkin will definitely get in (and Larkin’s better than that overrated left fielder).
by tonywf on Oct 25, 2009 1:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You pointed out the big HOF flaw...their criteria is based a lot on numbers
Davey should be in becuase
1. Everybody knows he was cool
2. Country of Origin should matter
3. He didn’t use his real last name
4. His slump busting technique is HOF material
5. http://www.columbussports.com/content/bm~pix/concepcion~s600x600.jpg
What more can we do tony? What more can we say?
Jay Bruce will become a major league baseball STAR, starting in April, 2010.....
by Madville on Oct 25, 2009 7:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nothing...
….but I’d disagree that basing it on numbers is a flaw. It should be based in part on numbers. And for regular players (not the announcers), it still is, as much as people criticize them for some of the players they put in, but the stuff you’re mentioning isn’t going to help. Scooter and Rice were able to get in because so many people publicly campaigned for them to be inducted (it seemed every year since the 2000s some big name has written an article or two on why Rice and Dawson belong in the HOF [and I think Dawson is the more deserving, of either]). Then the ex-players publicly campaigned, even previous HOF inductees in their speeches, for who they’d like to see in. When was the last time any of these folks have done this on behalf of Davey? Still, even if there is, there’s no guarantee they would be inducted. A lot of people campaigned for our Old Left Hander and he still failed to get the Frick Award (instead, it went to a Mariners announcer).
And I hate to say it, looking at it objectively, Concepcion doesn’t belong in the HOF. His career OPS+ was 88 and had a total zone fielding runs above average (Rtz) in his career at his position of 29 runs (which is very good, but nowhere near Ozzie Smith’s 213 Rtz [and Smith has very comparable offensive numbers to Concepcion, a little less power but more speed]). I wish I was wrong, but if a numbers geek like myself is looking at it in those terms, and Dave was my favorite player growing up, I somehow don’t think anyone on the committee is going to think differently (unless there’s some comparable campaign like the one that helped get an undeserving player like Rice in the HOF).
by tonywf on Oct 25, 2009 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
other numbers
9 all star games
5 time gold glove winner
6.8k/9 as a 40 year old pitcher
.789 OPS in postseason play (love to see that against the avg SS from 70-80)
2326 career hits
anyone who didnt see Davey play with their own eyes will have a less impressive view of him than those of us who did. he had a cannon for an arm and was a slick fielder. he gave up range as he aged which dilutes his range numbers, as a youngster he was unbelievable. no one made the the deep throw from the SS hole on turf as well as he did.
"I have found me a home"
by obc2 on Oct 25, 2009 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I Grew Up Watching Him...
…and he wasn’t as good as Larkin, and Larkin is likely not a first ballot HOFer. I seriously doubt Davey’s getting in. You can selectively use numbers that are favorable, but his overall numbers as a hitter are unfortunately undermined by what happened to the position offensively in the ‘80s, and his defensive numbers were very good but not enough to get him over purely on fielding. Even if you take off the last several years when his range dissipated (basically, from 1984 onward), which is hardly fair to any other player who you judge by the entirety of their career, you save 18.8 runs, pushing up his career Rtz at short to 48.1. That is still not even close to someone like Ozzie Smith. I don’t know what else to say. I loved watching him play, but I’m not going to tell myself those are HOF numbers or that he is a HOF player. He doesn’t have to be. He was still great when he was here and was an important cog on those championship teams.
by tonywf on Oct 25, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great work
I see a lot of writers saying that Larkin belongs in, which he does, but I have a feeling that that’s because they are progressive internet writers. I wonder if the average BBWA recognizes his value. For instance, Larkin doesn’t have any black ink. That is, he didn’t lead the NL in a single offensive category in his career. That’s something that I expect a few writers to make into a big deal. Also, his gray ink (top 10 rank in offensive categories) is also weak for a potential hall of famer. This leads to a weak rank in the Hall of Fame Monitor, which looks less at who is deserving and more at who is likely to make it.
So, while Larkin is very deserving to be a Hall of Famer, I think there will be some issues convincing the BBWA of that. He may not have as tough of a time as Tim Raines, but it could still take a couple of years.
Definitely a good argument.
by Slyde on Oct 23, 2009 11:03 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hall of Fame discussion season
is a time of year I have to avoid ESPN talking heads at all costs. It drives me crazy, most of all because I actually don’t care much about the hall of fame, yet ass-headed arguments about it tick me off.
People, please. We're all frightened and horny, but we can't let some killer dolphins keep us from living and scoring
by Man Mountain on Oct 23, 2009 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am in this camp as well.
Wear something sexy to my funeral.
by Pops Daniels on Oct 23, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Me too, except for Concepcion
Jay Bruce will become a major league baseball STAR, starting in April, 2010.....
by Madville on Oct 23, 2009 7:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ass-headed arguments supporting Concepcion don't bother you?
by Brian B on Oct 24, 2009 12:45 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Davey is deserving cause I say so....so, no assheaded arguments are inconsequential
Jay Bruce will become a major league baseball STAR, starting in April, 2010.....
by Madville on Oct 24, 2009 5:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fielding
The fact that Larkin played as a shortstop, and played well, is a huge part of his case. That’s his position adjustment. And that’s the big thing the WAR data provide for us—a way to quantitatively assess differences in position and how that impacts overall value. …. and, of course, that’s the sort of data that writers don’t have a stat that tells them anything about. At least AVG/HR/RBI is correlated to good estimates of run production. :)
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is the replacement level for WAR here across every season since 1871
or is it era specific?
Yeah, those guys and the Cincinnati Reds. They're a terrible football team. / Because they're a baseball team? / Exactly. You know who's the worst football team? The Philadelphia Flyers. - Best Show
by RijoSaboCaseyWKRP on Oct 23, 2009 11:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm honestly not sure
But I think Rally uses 2 wins/season as the typical difference between replacement and the average player. I could probably double check this. I think it is probably the case that 1900’s players, in particular, may have a problem because of the poor level of competition.
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doubled checked
It looks like the replacement level is pretty close to constant over the years. I pulled stats from Cap Anson, Ted Williams, Pete Rose, and Barry Larkin from baseballprojection.com, and saw that replacement runs per 700 PA fluctuated between 17 and 22 or so over those years, with a mean of 19.4. No particular patter either that I saw. My guess is that it might be because he’s using 2 wins/season, and then converting it to runs, so the runs/win fluctuates from year to year as the run environment changes. Not sure, though, and I don’t have time to check right now. :(
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
anybody see this?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/TV/10/23/soupy.sales/index.html
we have a race!
Alway the optimist...I like your think kid...
by boobs on Oct 23, 2009 12:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Who had Soupy?
And what are the totals?
by Brian B on Oct 24, 2009 12:47 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, sure.
But what’s the case for Berry?
Let me write out a formal proof for you.
by Gray on Oct 23, 2009 12:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Nice
Wear something sexy to my funeral.
by Pops Daniels on Oct 23, 2009 12:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Repoz
I swear that man sent me about 40% of all the traffic I ever got at my “old” blog. Another 50% came from red reporter and redleg nation. The rest of it was probably people looking for porn but somehow arriving at my blog by mistake and being horribly disappointed. :)
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Most of the people that end up here are looking for porn
but are stupid.
Definitely a good argument.
by Slyde on Oct 23, 2009 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
no offense to everyone that's here
I mean a different group of people.
Definitely a good argument.
by Slyde on Oct 23, 2009 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's true.
I first found this site after googling “hott homer bailey nekkid pix”
IAN! I'm on traain!
by andromache on Oct 23, 2009 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
luckily for you, that was a theme of JD's posting for about 2 months in 2006
It was almost starting to get old.
Definitely a good argument.
by Slyde on Oct 23, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's the answer to one of my favorite riddles:
What silky undergarment did Sigmund wear after doing an assload of coke with his male life partner?
Wear something sexy to my funeral.
by Pops Daniels on Oct 23, 2009 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
when i first read this, i thought it was about those two magicians
Roydian slip
Alway the optimist...I like your think kid...
by boobs on Oct 23, 2009 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Offense? I wear it as a badge of honor!
"What the hell are spanks????"
by jch24 on Oct 23, 2009 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
or, more properly, "fig leaf of honor"
People, please. We're all frightened and horny, but we can't let some killer dolphins keep us from living and scoring
by Man Mountain on Oct 24, 2009 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One thing
Yount and Banks aren’t good comps, I don’t think.
Only 55% of Yount’s innings were at SS; in fact, he never played an inning there after turning 29. Factor in his games as DH, and only 52% of his PA were as SS. Banks’ time at SS is even lower – 46% of innings, or 39% of PA. and never after turning 31 (he actually played 1B more than SS). Larkin, on the other hand, spent his entire career at SS other than 18 innings (2B) his rookie year and 3 interleague games (DH).
I can hear you now – “Why not just compare their time at SS?” That would take out all of the decline phase of Yount’s and Banks’ careers, which would be grossly unfair.
I don’t think there’s really any question that Larkin’s election would enhance the HOF.
*
There are another 12 elected by the Veterans’ committee, but a) their standards tend to be lower than those of the BBWAA (yes, despite Jim Rice)…
I don’t think this is entirely right. The Veteran’s Committee was set up because it was felt that the BBWAA standards were too high, leaving out deserving players. With the exception of the “every member of the ’27 Yankees must be inducted” days in the ’50s, the VC has done an excellent job.
"You never know how you look through other people's eyes"
by sidnancy on Oct 23, 2009 12:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Veterans committee = lower standards
We’re in agreement on that, I think. Tango’s demonstrated that specifically in that the career path for BBWAA HoF’ers is higher on each season (best to worst) than Veteran’s committee HoF’ers. It’s indisputable. That’s why I chose to focus on BBWAA players—they’re a more select group, and so if Larkin matches up well to them (and he does) then he has a better case compared to just all HOF’ers.
As for Yount and Banks, I agree, sort of. It’s absolutely the case that they spent a lot of their time at other positions, but they were elected as a SS according to the HOF website and so that is why I put them in this sample. You could argue that I shouldn’t have used them as comps in the graph (and I’m happy to run graphs of any comps people want). But then again, since we specifically include considerations for difficulty of fielding position in the WAR measures, it sort of doesn’t matter. All players are comparable across positions. The reason Banks falls of the cliff is in large part because he moved to 1B but a) didn’t hit like it, and b) didn’t field like a SS playing 1B should.
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hard to believe
That Larkin had better numbers than Ernie Banks. And also kind of surpised to see that he has the 3rd best offensive numbers on the list.
I think Larkin is a shoo in, not first ballot but he deserves to get in. He is one of my all time favorites.
by backtocali on Oct 23, 2009 1:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
you know what i hate about the hall of fame debates?
saying someone is a hall of famer, but not a first ballot hall of famer. what makes them better after the first year of eligibility has passed?
Made from 100% Recycled Awesome,
by 'tHan on Oct 23, 2009 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it took christy mathewson 20 years to get into the hall of fame
Alway the optimist...I like your think kid...
by boobs on Oct 23, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep, first ballot is a ridiculous marker
The only reason players should get in later is if something comes to light that makes us appreciate them more later on. So, for example, (supposed) non-steroid users look better now vs. confirmed steroid users. Or even now we better recognize the importance of OBP over AVG, and so we look at player statistics differently now vs. how we might have in the 70’s or 80’s.
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't that term used mainly to reflect the reality of the election process rather than the player?
People, please. We're all frightened and horny, but we can't let some killer dolphins keep us from living and scoring
by Man Mountain on Oct 24, 2009 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like this comment from BBTF by Yankee Clapper (even if I hate the Yankees):
Derek Jeter’s most similar batter is Barry Larkin according to BB-Ref. That certainly makes Larkin a Hall of Famer!
Additionally, when you’re the best in your league at your position for a decade (demonstrated by the All-Star selections & Silver Sluggers, as well as a few Gold Gloves) you’re in. May take 3 or 4 ballots because the counting numbers are little light due to the missed games. Wouldn’t be a problem if the voters made a sufficient positional adjustment but it seems they are a little slow on that.
I think that all of his awards as a SS, plus his MVP season of course, strengthen his case a lot, despite Slyde’s point about lacking black ink.
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 2:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
my point was only that he's not likely a "first ballot" hall of famer
I think he gets in eventually, within 5 years. I think some writers don’t pay attention to players on their first ballot just based on their gut, which obviously is stupid.
Definitely a good argument.
by Slyde on Oct 23, 2009 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope so
I’m honestly concerned that he’s going to get stuck like Trammell apparently has. I hope they both get in, and I think(?) Larkin’s case is a bit better than Trammell’s. But I don’t feel like I have any real idea of what BBWAA want in a HOF’er at this point.
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I really can’t see Barry getting in as a First Ballot player but the standard has changed over the years so who knows. I agree that he’ll get in within the first five though.
As for Davey I think he gets in eventually via the veteran’s committee. Look at his numbers against the current HOF shortstops and see where he stands. Quite favorably to me.
Final argument… if he played 18 years for the Boston Red Sox do you think we would even be having this discussion? :)
Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.
by Caleb on Oct 26, 2009 7:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Davey
Eventually A-Rod and Jeter will be in the HOF, and how does he compare against them?
i mean sometimes Walt is like a prison shower, you know it is gonna happen, but it isn’t a good thing.
by justin007000 on Oct 27, 2009 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Awesome
Love this article. Larkin for the hall!
People Don't Kill People. Burning Couches Kill People.
by crolfer on Oct 23, 2009 2:21 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
“Tango’s demonstrated that specifically in that the career path for BBWAA HoF’ers is higher on each season (best to worst) than Veteran’s committee HoF’ers. It’s indisputable. That’s why I chose to focus on BBWAA players—they’re a more select group, and so if Larkin matches up well to them (and he does) then he has a better case compared to just all HOF’ers.”
Well, wouldn’t you expect that? BBWAA gets the first 15 shots at every player and the Veterans committee gets the scraps. How many Ted Williams, Ty Cobb, Cy Young, Babe Ruth, etc, made it through 15 BBWAA votes without getting elected?
by erosen on Oct 23, 2009 2:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yep, true enough
My point, though, is just that it’s a more select group. You’re right that maybe standards isn’t the entire issue, but also just available player sample.
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another WAR graph
This one comparing Larkin, Trammel, Vizquel, ARod, and Jeter.
If I’m being honest with myself, I think Trammel, ARod, and Jeter look a bit better here. ARod and Jeter aren’t even fair to plot, as those two haven’t finished their careers yet and thus their line will probably get a bit flatter as they add more productive seasons (I am including 2009). And yet they already look stronger than Larkin (obviously ARod, in particular). Trammell is extremely similar to Larkin, but with a bit better peak and a little less production in non-peak years. HOF tends to favor peaks over average production—we like badasses. I think all four should get elected into the Hall.
Vizquel shouldn’t even be in discussion. His only hope is to be Ozzie Smith reincarnate, and he’s no where close to being as productive as Ozzie.
Any other graphs that you folks would like? I can make them pretty quick, as my spreadsheet’s mostly automated.
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 2:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I would like a "Top four RR members by CAR (comments above replacement)" graph
"What the hell are spanks????"
by jch24 on Oct 23, 2009 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
can you do this one?
How about the difference between Trammel and Larkin, plotted on the same X-axis. What do you think the error bars are? If you assume that Larkin, Trammel, and Jeter all have their “true ability” follow a straight line roughly parallel with the grey band, and that the bumpiness of their lines is entirely due to statistical fluctuations, it looks like the numbers are probably good to slightly better than +/- 0.5 WAR. That’s just eyeballing it, though, you’ve got the real numbers.
If that’s so, then Jeter’s 2nd, 3rd, and 14th best seasons are better than Larkin’s, while the rest are essentially equal. Trammel is, I’d say, a statistical dead heat.
by bbjones on Oct 23, 2009 11:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Neyer link
http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/994/friday-filberts-27
I think that’s my first Neyer link. :)
Does Neyer have HOF voting credentials? I can’t remember. If so, that should be one vote in the bag. Only a couple hundred more to go. ;)
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 3:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he has credentials for HOF
I think you have to have been in the BBWA for 10 years before you get those.
Definitely a good argument.
by Slyde on Oct 23, 2009 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really sure which way this goes, but...
Any impressions on whether his presence on MLB network will help or hurt him? Not that it should have any bearing at all, but I can’t help but wonder if it’s helped him remain in the general baseball consciousness at all.
That, and for better or worse, they do call him a future hall of famer regularly.
"Some times you get lucky; some times you get Willy Taveras." --Fay
by RedStalk on Oct 23, 2009 4:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Not sure
My feeling is that anything to keep his name fresh in people’s minds is a good thing. As long as it’s not related to steroids. :).
I don’t get mlb network, but how is he on there? I’d hope for Harold Reynolds and be afraid to get John Kruk…
by JinAZ on Oct 23, 2009 7:56 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
MLBN is the shizz
Sooooooo much better than BBTN. Lark is an analyst along with Al Leiter, Joe Magrane, Harold Reynolds, Sean Casey and others. Oh, and they have Hazel Mae, yummy.
"What the hell are spanks????"
by jch24 on Oct 23, 2009 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Larkin's a total douche on tv
Sorry, but it’s true.
by Brian B on Oct 24, 2009 12:50 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
But Hazel makes up for it. ROAR, END be damned.
"What the hell are spanks????"
by jch24 on Oct 24, 2009 1:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you know thats kevin barker's geef, right?
Alway the optimist...I like your think kid...
by boobs on Oct 24, 2009 2:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No one will read this I'm sure
But there’s a charity function at Metropolis tonight benefiting the Patty Brisben Foundation, who work to raise money for breast cancer research. If you’re home alone and bored (which you are if you’re reading this, let’s be honest), come out and see me. I’m entertaining if nothing else, and you’ll be contributing to a great organization and cause.
"What the hell are spanks????"
by jch24 on Oct 23, 2009 8:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
afterhours at Adonis?
"I have found me a home"
by obc2 on Oct 23, 2009 8:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Question time
Have you ever sneezed and not covered your mouth to the best of your memory? If not, why didn’t you? Because no one was there?
"What the hell are spanks????"
by jch24 on Oct 24, 2009 2:03 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
larkin & hof
really, really, nice ball player.
growing up a pirate fan in the ‘70s, i loathed most things red, but larkin deserved respect.
but my feelings about larkin are similar to those about derek jeter—surprisingly good career numbers given that a team was wanting if this guy hit anywhere other 2, 6, or 7.
and why the team almost always had a glove shortstop on the roster.
very nice statistical presentation that reinforces the notion that banks or yount would beat you; jeter & larkin would annoy you. an opposing manager wouldn’t calculate how to avoid larkin & jeter in the eighth; the hitters, ehh, you avoided.
you give a very nice veneer to the rotunda of very nice ball players.
nice work.
regards,
kevin warren
by wskksw on Oct 24, 2009 6:02 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Two points in response
1. Your arguments appear to be all about offense. Fielding matters, especially when comparing Larkin to Banks or, to a lesser degree, Yount. That’s what WAR helps us quantify and understand.
2. I agree that if Jeter doesn’t deserve to be in the Hall, then the same is probably true of Larkin. But you’re going to have a hard time finding folks who don’t think Jeter should be in the Hall, especially among sportswriters. Jeter’s a lock.
-j
by JinAZ on Oct 26, 2009 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
excellent post... as always...
barry is my favorite red of all time, so it’s hard for me to disagree.
by GrooveLeg on Oct 24, 2009 3:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well enough about Barry, we all love him etc
How about Dem Bearcat footballers!!!!
Jay Bruce will become a major league baseball STAR, starting in April, 2010.....
by Madville on Oct 24, 2009 5:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
almost as good as the Spartans
"I have found me a home"
by obc2 on Oct 24, 2009 9:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barry was good,
Why create new scale to quantify your choice? Wins above replacement/ Totally arbitrary. Just as most of these stats. The guys in the Hall of Fames were judged on the basic stats. If your guy does not measure up, he should not be in. Barry’s numbers are good enough for him to eventually get in. Stop trying to force the issue. I want Bob Uker (however his name is spelled) in the HOF, so i will crate a graph that makes him look good compared to someone else in the Hall. Is that fair? NO.
by dragon43078 on Oct 24, 2009 5:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
this has to be the worst argument I've ever heard
by sharks on Oct 24, 2009 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He/she's a Browns fan, does this surprise you? :)
"What the hell are spanks????"
by jch24 on Oct 24, 2009 7:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
actually, it looks like he/she is a bengals fan
Alway the optimist...I like your think kid...
by boobs on Oct 24, 2009 7:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, saw the membership to the Browns blog
I stand by my argument, however.
"What the hell are spanks????"
by jch24 on Oct 24, 2009 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That has to be one of the worst arguments I've ever heard.
Let me write out a formal proof for you.
by Gray on Oct 24, 2009 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
definitely a good argument
your retarded
"I have found me a home"
by obc2 on Oct 24, 2009 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i was going to write deinitely a good argument
but i couldn’t spell definitely, and i didn’t wanted to be lampooned.
i mean sometimes Walt is like a prison shower, you know it is gonna happen, but it isn’t a good thing.
by justin007000 on Oct 24, 2009 9:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i thought you used firefox
and benefited from the built-in spell checker. if you don’t, i highly recommend it.
Made from 100% Recycled Awesome,
by 'tHan on Oct 25, 2009 8:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what's firefux?
"I have found me a home"
by obc2 on Oct 25, 2009 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
aw, dang- beat me to it
People Don't Kill People. Burning Couches Kill People.
by crolfer on Oct 24, 2009 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
check over your shoulder
that’s the universe, lapping you.
by Charlie Scrabbles on Oct 24, 2009 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Miami-Clemson going to OT...
Sure, the teams aren’t amazing, but college football OT is great!
Let me write out a formal proof for you.
by Gray on Oct 24, 2009 7:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Channel?
"What the hell are spanks????"
by jch24 on Oct 24, 2009 7:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's on ABC here. Might be on an ESPN in non-ACC country.
Let me write out a formal proof for you.
by Gray on Oct 24, 2009 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Crap, can't find it
Oh well.
"What the hell are spanks????"
by jch24 on Oct 24, 2009 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Game over.
Miami got a field goal, then Clemson won it on a pass down the middle.
Let me write out a formal proof for you.
by Gray on Oct 24, 2009 7:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pretty exciting game
Unlike the Michigan-Penn State game. :-P
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
by BubbaFan on Oct 24, 2009 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Esp. If you're a Michigan fan
That was just a bad game all around
I'mma let you finish, but....
by nycredsfan on Oct 24, 2009 8:41 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and emoticon fail
I'mma let you finish, but....
by nycredsfan on Oct 24, 2009 8:42 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Padres have a new GM
SAN DIEGO – Jed Hoyer was once co-general manager of the Boston Red Sox for 44 days after Theo Epstein walked away from the job.Now Hoyer has a GM gig of his own.
The San Diego Padres have hired Hoyer as their new general manager, a person with knowledge of the situation said Saturday.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
by BubbaFan on Oct 24, 2009 9:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hmmmm
Time for a brief break from fantasy to boring fantasy.
Its a MadsReview of ’The Invention of Lying"
I really wanted to like this film. The stars are:
Mark Ricky Gervais
Anna Jennifer Garner
Frank Jonah Hill
Anthony Jeffrey Tambor
Martha Fionnula Flanagan
Brad Rob Lowe
Shelley Tina Fey
Even with a terrific cast, a great effort by Ricky Gervais and a yeoman effort by Jennifer Garner this movie is just old and tired before it even gets going. The premise could be funny…a world where no one knows how to lie and therefore….therefore life is incredibly structured and predictable and boring. But actually the premise is isn’t funny so the movie becomes cliched, predictable and incredibly boring.I guess this could be a ‘chick flick’…but The FMM almost fell asleep during it. I won’t go into detail as you may wish to see this movie and therefore I don’t wish to spoil it…some folks might think this film moving or sweet or romantic in a English black comedy kind of way.
I thought that Up was pretty insipid but compared to The Invention of Lying, Up is a deeply moving.
One serious note – Jennifer Garner looks distorted in this movie with her hollow shrunken face and neck and stumpy legs.
On the Mads scale where 10 is excellent and 1 is puke The Invention of Lying comes in at a rousing 4.
http://www.cinemaspartan.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/2009_the_invention_of_lying_016-500×333.jpg
Jay Bruce will become a major league baseball STAR, starting in April, 2010.....
by Madville on Oct 25, 2009 12:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i haven't see this movie
but i figured it would either be funny, or boring and trite. I do love Ricky Gervais, so that is probably why i wasn’t hoping this movie would be good. If say it stared Richard Gere I would have known it would be boring.
I guess i made the right choice when i decided to see Zoombieland over this.
Thanks Mads. //thumbs up
i mean sometimes Walt is like a prison shower, you know it is gonna happen, but it isn’t a good thing.
by justin007000 on Oct 25, 2009 12:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Playing record / Team record
How did the Reds team perform during Barry Larkin’s career? May be Larkin’s personal records fit the threshold for a HOF, but did the Reds team win anything during that span? How instrumental was Larkin’s leadership and how valuable was Larkin to his team? What contribution did he make to the Reds team’s success?
Personally I feel Larkin should be a HOF, but may be not in his first year of eligibility..
by Richard L on Oct 25, 2009 12:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
is this a serious comment?
Made from 100% Recycled Awesome,
by 'tHan on Oct 25, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How many World Series did the Red Sox win while Ted Williams was playing?
IAN! I'm on traain!
by andromache on Oct 25, 2009 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How many did Ryne Sandberg win?
Tony Gwynn?
"I have found me a home"
by obc2 on Oct 25, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
During Barry's career, the Reds had a .501 winning percentage
In games that Barry started, the Reds had a .522 winning percentage. In games that Barry played, they had a .516 winning percentage.
Yes, I think he made his team’s better.
Definitely a good argument.
by Slyde on Oct 25, 2009 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'm adding this for the hell of it.
i mean sometimes Walt is like a prison shower, you know it is gonna happen, but it isn’t a good thing.
by justin007000 on Oct 25, 2009 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
who the hell is Bates?
And how is someone that tiny a baseball player?
"And then there was the USAID guy in Kandahar who drove a giant pink Cadillac, which the locals set on fire one day. If you wanted to destroy something symbolic during a riot, you just could not do better than that. Good stuff." - Ghosts of Alexander
by Cy Schourek on Oct 25, 2009 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
must be this guy
He’s listed at 5’-7", 155 lbs.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
by BubbaFan on Oct 25, 2009 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
um
Billy Bates scored one of the most important runs of that season. Reds fan much?
Definitely a good argument.
by Slyde on Oct 25, 2009 11:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't agree with this
but Tracy Jones liked to spot off that Larking would face some difficulty getting into the Hall of Fame because he played for bad teams, with the exception of 1990, 1995, and 1999. I think it is a bunch of shit, but Tracy did play the game…
Has Tracy been let go yet?
i mean sometimes Walt is like a prison shower, you know it is gonna happen, but it isn’t a good thing.
by justin007000 on Oct 25, 2009 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
tracy's good at what he does
case in point his comments being posted here. he’s there to stir the pot.
"I have found me a home"
by obc2 on Oct 25, 2009 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i just kinda hope that he and doc rogers will lose their ability to speak...
i mean sometimes Walt is like a prison shower, you know it is gonna happen, but it isn’t a good thing.
by justin007000 on Oct 25, 2009 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you could just stop listening to them
Definitely a good argument.
by Slyde on Oct 25, 2009 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't listen to them
but it would be nice if they had somebody intelligent on, so I could enjoy listening to people talk about baseball on the radio.
i mean sometimes Walt is like a prison shower, you know it is gonna happen, but it isn’t a good thing.
by justin007000 on Oct 25, 2009 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doc has lost his ability to make sense
Jay Bruce will become a major league baseball STAR, starting in April, 2010.....
by Madville on Oct 25, 2009 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ironic
that you noticed that trait, no?
"I have found me a home"
by obc2 on Oct 25, 2009 7:36 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You sir may get in line behine the entire ELO
Jay Bruce will become a major league baseball STAR, starting in April, 2010.....
by Madville on Oct 25, 2009 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So if Dusty survives until August
he will have the longest tenure of any Reds manager since Jack Mckeon.
Bob Boone opened 2001, was fired in mid July 2003.
Dave Miley took over and was fired in June of 2005.
Jerry Narron took over and was fired in early July 2007.
McKannin finished 2007.
Dusty started in 2008.
Also if Walt survives the season (which unless he has a personal issue; family, health, etc, he will) he will have held the GM’s position the longest since Jim Bowden. 2 years of DanO and Wayner with sprinkles of Kullman since Bowden was fired in 2003.
i mean sometimes Walt is like a prison shower, you know it is gonna happen, but it isn’t a good thing.
by justin007000 on Oct 25, 2009 4:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
what a bannana republic of a franchise.
"And then there was the USAID guy in Kandahar who drove a giant pink Cadillac, which the locals set on fire one day. If you wanted to destroy something symbolic during a riot, you just could not do better than that. Good stuff." - Ghosts of Alexander
by Cy Schourek on Oct 25, 2009 10:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Davey or Barry played in Boston or NY
They’d both be first ballot HOFers…….
First time I shot her, shot her in the side.
Hard to watch her suffer, but with the second shot she died...
by btcoop71 on Oct 26, 2009 12:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree on Larkin
Not so sure on Concepcion. I don’t think he was hurting for publicity or viewers playing with the BRM. Since most of his value is his supposed defensive wizardry, I doubt that he was hurt by the fact that people didn’t see him play. The BRM were always on TV in the 70s.
Definitely a good argument.
by Slyde on Oct 26, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The BRM possibly the greatest team of all time
and look how long it took for Tony to get in.
Pete and Davey both should be in the HOF, Griffey Sr. too, because he sired Ken Griffey Jr.
To understand Israel and the Middle East, you must understand Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. -Glenn Beck (former cocaine addict and pedophile.)
by Madville on Oct 27, 2009 11:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It took Tony so long to get in because it's debatable as to whether or not he belongs there
in the same fashion that it was debatable as to whether or not Jim Rice belongs.
There is very little “team bias” in the Hall of Fame. These are the Yanks and Sawx elected to the Hall by the writers in the 30 years:
Jim Rice
Goose Gossage
Wade Boggs
Dennis Eckersley
Dave Winfield
Carlton Fisk
Phil Niekro
Reggie Jackson
Tom Seaver
Carl Yastrzemski
Catfish Hunter
That’s 11 guys, and Gossage, Eckersley, Winfield, Niekro, Jackson, Seaver, and Hunter are all arguably associated with other franchises more.
How many former Reds have been elected in the last 30 years?
Perez
Morgan
Bench
Seaver
Robinson
Seems like a pretty even spread, no? Davey’s not not in the hall because of some team bias. He’s not in the hall because his case just isn’t strong enough. If he made it, he’d be a borderline player on the same level as Rice and Perez.
Definitely a good argument.
by Slyde on Oct 27, 2009 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Rice and Perez are "borderline"
Then it’s flat out incredible that Ron Robinson is in the hall.
by Brian B on Oct 28, 2009 8:48 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Rice is borderline - Tony was clutch
There I said it..that awful C word…oh well at least Perez got in..Seaver however is always associated with the Mets and Frank is just as associated with the Orioles as the Reds.
I know Davey’s borderline… I still think he should get in, Pete too.
My opinion on Jim Rice getting in is:
To understand Israel and the Middle East, you must understand Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. -Glenn Beck (former cocaine addict and pedophile.)
by Madville on Oct 27, 2009 3:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
