96 Hoffman
-
Why is he a 96? He's just as good as MO and maybe the best closer ever.
-
No way he's as good as MO. He deserves a 99 tho, so I agree with you there.
-
Def should be a 99. Not sure. Only reasoning I can think of is similar to 95 Glavine in that they were fairly early releases? Also one of the few closers who deserved a CY award. I believe he finished 2nd in his 53/54 SV opp season. And if memory serves, he would've won it had a couple of voters not left him off their ballot entirely.
-
Hes among the players that they screwed their overalls along with guys like Eckersley and Whitey Ford.
-
I will point at career H/9, K/9, and BB/9 as to why Hoffman, Glavine, and Eckersley are not 99s. Those are the 3 attributes that drive overall( for sig series, prime and awards before the future stars and finest hate club jumps on this). Glavine and Hoffman's career K/9 isn't that good, even in their era. As for Eck, SDS has said in the past it's harder for a reliever to be a 99, and even then the best reason that proves Eck should be a 99(Sig Kenley) has better career H/9 and K/9. There are many problems with this game, but attributes and overalls on signature series cards are actually extremely accurate
-
Rivera 7.0 H/9* 2.0 BB/9* 8.2 K/9*
Hoffman 7.0 H/9* 2.5 BB/9* 9.4 K/9*Gossage 7.4 H/9* 3.6 BB/9* 7.5 K/9*
-
@formallyforearms said in 96 Hoffman:
Rivera 7.0 H/9* 2.0 BB/9* 8.2 K/9*
Hoffman 7.0 H/9* 2.5 BB/9* 9.4 K/9*Gossage 7.4 H/9* 3.6 BB/9* 7.5 K/9*
So Goose is the one that should be a 96?
-
So Goose is the one that should be a 96?
Hard to compare across eras. Mo and Hoffman could ride in and get three outs. Goose had to go 2, 3, 4 innings, sometimes facing the same batter multiple times. Being that good in a long outing is pretty special.
-
@formallyforearms said in 96 Hoffman:
Rivera 7.0 H/9* 2.0 BB/9* 8.2 K/9*
Hoffman 7.0 H/9* 2.5 BB/9* 9.4 K/9*Gossage 7.4 H/9* 3.6 BB/9* 7.5 K/9*
I stand corrected on Hoffman then. I guess I never realized he struck that many batters out. I guess I don't know why Hoffman isn't a 99. My point on Glavine and Eck stand though. Eck would have been a 99 if they gave him an awards card. His career was so long he gets screwed on the career averages
-
@the_dragon1912 said in 96 Hoffman:
@formallyforearms said in 96 Hoffman:
Rivera 7.0 H/9* 2.0 BB/9* 8.2 K/9*
Hoffman 7.0 H/9* 2.5 BB/9* 9.4 K/9*
Gossage 7.4 H/9* 3.6 BB/9* 7.5 K/9*I stand corrected on Hoffman then. I guess I never realized he struck that many batters out. I guess I don't know why Hoffman isn't a 99. My point on Glavine and Eck stand though. Eck would have been a 99 if they gave him an awards card. His career was so long he gets screwed on the career averages
I dont understand how they determine rating for awards either. Gagne has a 98 for his CY card.
4.0 H/9* 2.2 BB/9* 15.0 K/9*
He was absolutely dominant.
The ratings system seems arbitrary to me. -
@formallyforearms said in 96 Hoffman:
@the_dragon1912 said in 96 Hoffman:
@formallyforearms said in 96 Hoffman:
Rivera 7.0 H/9* 2.0 BB/9* 8.2 K/9*
Hoffman 7.0 H/9* 2.5 BB/9* 9.4 K/9*
Gossage 7.4 H/9* 3.6 BB/9* 7.5 K/9*I stand corrected on Hoffman then. I guess I never realized he struck that many batters out. I guess I don't know why Hoffman isn't a 99. My point on Glavine and Eck stand though. Eck would have been a 99 if they gave him an awards card. His career was so long he gets screwed on the career averages
I dont understand how they determine rating for awards either. Gagne has a 98 for his CY card.
4.0 H/9* 2.2 BB/9* 15.0 K/9*
He was absolutely dominant.
The ratings system seems arbitrary to me.Overalls maybe are yes. The attributes themselves certainly have statistical significance behind them(except for future stars, Finest, Topps now, Monthly awards). I don't care about the overalls on the card anyway though
-
@the_dragon1912 said in 96 Hoffman:
@formallyforearms said in 96 Hoffman:
@the_dragon1912 said in 96 Hoffman:
@formallyforearms said in 96 Hoffman:
Rivera 7.0 H/9* 2.0 BB/9* 8.2 K/9*
Hoffman 7.0 H/9* 2.5 BB/9* 9.4 K/9*
Gossage 7.4 H/9* 3.6 BB/9* 7.5 K/9*I stand corrected on Hoffman then. I guess I never realized he struck that many batters out. I guess I don't know why Hoffman isn't a 99. My point on Glavine and Eck stand though. Eck would have been a 99 if they gave him an awards card. His career was so long he gets screwed on the career averages
I dont understand how they determine rating for awards either. Gagne has a 98 for his CY card.
4.0 H/9* 2.2 BB/9* 15.0 K/9*
He was absolutely dominant.
The ratings system seems arbitrary to me.Overalls maybe are yes. The attributes themselves certainly have statistical significance behind them(except for future stars, Finest, Topps now, Monthly awards). I don't care about the overalls on the card anyway though
It appears H/9 does fall in line with a statistical formula, just going by a little quick research. Some others definitely dont. K/9 and the corresponding attributes have no correlation. I'm unclear how K/9 attribute affects gameplay, so I dont know how relevant it is. I'm only bringing that up as you mentioned it being one of the main rating factors in your earlier post.
-
@studman7_psn said in 96 Hoffman:
So Goose is the one that should be a 96?
Hard to compare across eras. Mo and Hoffman could ride in and get three outs. Goose had to go 2, 3, 4 innings, sometimes facing the same batter multiple times. Being that good in a long outing is pretty special.
what a beast...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knhVHLtub4U -
@formallyforearms said in 96 Hoffman:
Hes among the players that they screwed their overalls along with guys like Eckersley and Whitey Ford.
Same with rollie and gagne
-
Excellent article regarding the value of Goose. He pitched in much tougher situations than the average closer today.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/goose-egg-new-save-stat-relief-pitchers/
-
@themadhatter711 said in 96 Hoffman:
Excellent article regarding the value of Goose. He pitched in much tougher situations than the average closer today.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/goose-egg-new-save-stat-relief-pitchers/
I have no issues with Goose, I know his value and remember what kind of a pitcher he was. I included his numbers as a comparison above, as an attempt to validate why Hoffman got screwed with his SS card.
-
@drg179_psn said in 96 Hoffman:
Why is he a 96? He's just as good as MO and maybe the best closer ever.
He’s not even close to mariano Rivera. It’s one thing to be an unbelievable closer it’s a whole other thing to be an unbelievable closer in the playoffs. Mariano and Hoffman are incomparable due to the playoffs.
-
@formallyforearms said in 96 Hoffman:
@themadhatter711 said in 96 Hoffman:
Excellent article regarding the value of Goose. He pitched in much tougher situations than the average closer today.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/goose-egg-new-save-stat-relief-pitchers/
I have no issues with Goose, I know his value and remember what kind of a pitcher he was. I included his numbers as a comparison above, as an attempt to validate why Hoffman got screwed with his SS card.
Of course - this was just an excuse for me to share one of my favorite articles I've read in the last few years.
-
i do not do well w/ him at all. I think it's his circle change that always gets hit hard. i have not used him in a long time so i think that was the pitch.
-
@a_perfectgame said in 96 Hoffman:
@drg179_psn said in 96 Hoffman:
Why is he a 96? He's just as good as MO and maybe the best closer ever.
He’s not even close to mariano Rivera. It’s one thing to be an unbelievable closer it’s a whole other thing to be an unbelievable closer in the playoffs. Mariano and Hoffman are incomparable due to the playoffs.
Hoffman had over 600 saves with a higher K rate Padres didnt get many playoff shots not his fault.
