Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?
-
Really?
Is access to Baseball-reference.com blocked in the SDS offices by the IT guys?
Carew hit 92 HRs in his career...in 9315 ABs.
Morgan hit 268...in almost the same amount of ABs...9277.
Carew 86 POW R/73 POW L
Morgan 82 POW R/71 POW LBoth are Diamond 99 cards in the Charisma series...so I'm assuming these are supposed to represent these players at their PEAK.
How/why does the guy with 92 career HRs have better POW than the guy with 268?
I'll wait patiently for an answer from the staunch SDS defenders on this forum.
And for anyone who wants to say "who cares"...if they gave LS Arraez better POW ratings than LS Trout...you'd think that was stupid, no?
-
shouldn't assume that charisma cards represent the players "peak, Prime series represents a players peak seasons. They actually haven't given any indication of what a charisma series is based on.
-
Morgan will get a much better card in season 3. While most of the cards out now are great they left room for improvement on future cards. Only cards that are tough to improve on are babe and chipper.
-
Joe shouldn’t have publicly disavowed analytics during his announcing days. Because it was those advanced analytics that proved how much better a 2B he was compared to his contemporaries.
#FireJoeMorgan
-
Despite fewer HR, Carew has a higher slugging percentage than Morgan for their careers. Since Power in The Show isn't just for HR, you could argue that it makes sense for Carew to have slightly better power. Although when you break the Slugging into vs RHP and vs LHP splits, it is Carew (.444/.396) vs Morgan (.446/.388).
Regardless, when you look at slugging percentage instead of just HR, it's reasonable that the two of them have very similar power - especially because we aren't sure what season(s) the Charisma series cards are based on.
-
@UDVikings_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
Despite fewer HR, Carew has a higher slugging percentage than Morgan for their careers. Since Power in The Show isn't just for HR, you could argue that it makes sense for Carew to have slightly better power. Although when you break the Slugging into vs RHP and vs LHP splits, it is Carew (.444/.396) vs Morgan (.446/.388).
Regardless, when you look at slugging percentage instead of just HR, it's reasonable that the two of them have very similar power - especially because we aren't sure what season(s) the Charisma series cards are based on.
Now this guy provides an intelligent answer instead of illogical complaining from OP
-
@UDVikings_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
Despite fewer HR, Carew has a higher slugging percentage than Morgan for their careers. Since Power in The Show isn't just for HR, you could argue that it makes sense for Carew to have slightly better power. Although when you break the Slugging into vs RHP and vs LHP splits, it is Carew (.444/.396) vs Morgan (.446/.388).
Regardless, when you look at slugging percentage instead of just HR, it's reasonable that the two of them have very similar power - especially because we aren't sure what season(s) the Charisma series cards are based on.
That is true, but if someone uses their ability to slap the ball to all fields combined with their speed to hit lots of triples…then their slugging will appear higher. But that’s not because they hit the ball harder or with more power.
Carew’s SLUG aid high for two reasons, hit often hit for ridiculously high average and he hit lots of triples.
I’m not sure that should translate into a high POW rating in this game though. You aren’t going to hit more triples in this game with a higher POW rating…you’re going to hit more homers.
As for the Charisma series…the 99s in this set are just about maxed out. It’s hard to imagine a better version of any of the 99 Charisma cards.
-
@Hikes83_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@UDVikings_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
Despite fewer HR, Carew has a higher slugging percentage than Morgan for their careers. Since Power in The Show isn't just for HR, you could argue that it makes sense for Carew to have slightly better power. Although when you break the Slugging into vs RHP and vs LHP splits, it is Carew (.444/.396) vs Morgan (.446/.388).
Regardless, when you look at slugging percentage instead of just HR, it's reasonable that the two of them have very similar power - especially because we aren't sure what season(s) the Charisma series cards are based on.
Now this guy provides an intelligent answer instead of illogical complaining from OP
My “complaining” is hardly “illogical”.
I saw the career SLUG numbers. But I’ve also seen clips and highlights of both these historical players…and I did more than just look at the SLUG and assume the guys with the higher % had more Power.
Do you even know how SLUG is calculated?
Because if you do, you’d understand WHY Carew has a SLUG that’s higher…and it’s NOT because he had more power.
He hit for a very high average. Over .350 in 5 seasons. He rarely hit under .300 and when he did, it was barely under it.
Morgan hit over .300 twice in his career. Career .271 hitter but he did walk a lot.
SLUG is just total bases divided by at bats. So…if someone hits for a much higher average and legs out a lot of triples…their SLUG is going to make it seem as though they have more Power….IF you blindly believe that SLUG% just equals power. It doesn’t…and can be skewed. Especially with players from a different era when the game was played differently.
Morgan had good speed too. Stole more bases than Carew. And himself piled up a high number of triples in a couple seasons.
The best example of this is Carew’s 1977 season where he SLUG’d a whipping .570.
He did so with only 14 HRs…a career high for him. He had 38 doubles and a league leading 16 triples though.
Oh…and he hit .388.
239 hits. 68 of them for extra bases.
But that means he SLUG’d .570 while still hitting 171 singles.
71.5% of his hits were singles.
I could do a similar breakdown for Morgan and you’d see a much lower average, and a higher percentage of hits being XBH…and most importantly…HRs.
Sorry…but we all play this game and we know that a higher POW rating means more HRs…not more triples.
But…I’m just here making totally “illogical” arguments.
-
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@Hikes83_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@UDVikings_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
Despite fewer HR, Carew has a higher slugging percentage than Morgan for their careers. Since Power in The Show isn't just for HR, you could argue that it makes sense for Carew to have slightly better power. Although when you break the Slugging into vs RHP and vs LHP splits, it is Carew (.444/.396) vs Morgan (.446/.388).
Regardless, when you look at slugging percentage instead of just HR, it's reasonable that the two of them have very similar power - especially because we aren't sure what season(s) the Charisma series cards are based on.
Now this guy provides an intelligent answer instead of illogical complaining from OP
My “complaining” is hardly “illogical”.
I saw the career SLUG numbers. But I’ve also seen clips and highlights of both these historical players…and I did more than just look at the SLUG and assume the guys with the higher % had more Power.
Do you even know how SLUG is calculated?
Because if you do, you’d understand WHY Carew has a SLUG that’s higher…and it’s NOT because he had more power.
He hit for a very high average. Over .350 in 5 seasons. He rarely hit under .300 and when he did, it was barely under it.
Morgan hit over .300 twice in his career. Career .271 hitter but he did walk a lot.
SLUG is just total bases divided by at bats. So…if someone hits for a much higher average and legs out a lot of triples…their SLUG is going to make it seem as though they have more Power….IF you blindly believe that SLUG% just equals power. It doesn’t…and can be skewed. Especially with players from a different era when the game was played differently.
Morgan had good speed too. Stole more bases than Carew. And himself piled up a high number of triples in a couple seasons.
The best example of this is Carew’s 1977 season where he SLUG’d a whipping .570.
He did so with only 14 HRs…a career high for him. He had 38 doubles and a league leading 16 triples though.
Oh…and he hit .388.
239 hits. 68 of them for extra bases.
But that means he SLUG’d .570 while still hitting 171 singles.
71.5% of his hits were singles.
I could do a similar breakdown for Morgan and you’d see a much lower average, and a higher percentage of hits being XBH…and most importantly…HRs.
Sorry…but we all play this game and we know that a higher POW rating means more HRs…not more triples.
But…I’m just here making totally “illogical” arguments.
To be fair, the only argument you threw in your original post is HRs. That’s all
If you would’ve brought all this to the table originally, would make more sense
-
@Hikes83_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@Hikes83_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@UDVikings_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
Despite fewer HR, Carew has a higher slugging percentage than Morgan for their careers. Since Power in The Show isn't just for HR, you could argue that it makes sense for Carew to have slightly better power. Although when you break the Slugging into vs RHP and vs LHP splits, it is Carew (.444/.396) vs Morgan (.446/.388).
Regardless, when you look at slugging percentage instead of just HR, it's reasonable that the two of them have very similar power - especially because we aren't sure what season(s) the Charisma series cards are based on.
Now this guy provides an intelligent answer instead of illogical complaining from OP
My “complaining” is hardly “illogical”.
I saw the career SLUG numbers. But I’ve also seen clips and highlights of both these historical players…and I did more than just look at the SLUG and assume the guys with the higher % had more Power.
Do you even know how SLUG is calculated?
Because if you do, you’d understand WHY Carew has a SLUG that’s higher…and it’s NOT because he had more power.
He hit for a very high average. Over .350 in 5 seasons. He rarely hit under .300 and when he did, it was barely under it.
Morgan hit over .300 twice in his career. Career .271 hitter but he did walk a lot.
SLUG is just total bases divided by at bats. So…if someone hits for a much higher average and legs out a lot of triples…their SLUG is going to make it seem as though they have more Power….IF you blindly believe that SLUG% just equals power. It doesn’t…and can be skewed. Especially with players from a different era when the game was played differently.
Morgan had good speed too. Stole more bases than Carew. And himself piled up a high number of triples in a couple seasons.
The best example of this is Carew’s 1977 season where he SLUG’d a whipping .570.
He did so with only 14 HRs…a career high for him. He had 38 doubles and a league leading 16 triples though.
Oh…and he hit .388.
239 hits. 68 of them for extra bases.
But that means he SLUG’d .570 while still hitting 171 singles.
71.5% of his hits were singles.
I could do a similar breakdown for Morgan and you’d see a much lower average, and a higher percentage of hits being XBH…and most importantly…HRs.
Sorry…but we all play this game and we know that a higher POW rating means more HRs…not more triples.
But…I’m just here making totally “illogical” arguments.
To be fair, the only argument you threw in your original post is HRs. That’s all
Because that’s what POW translates to in this game.
268 is “slightly” larger than 92, no?
-
The better statistic to use for comparing power really would be ISO since it only factors in XBH to the equation (it's SLG-AVG so that it eliminates singles from the Total Base calculation). To that end, Morgan does outpace Carew for their careers (.156 ISO for Morgan to .101 for Carew). Even though you're right that Power, in-game, mostly affects the ability to hit HR, it does impact the ability to hit for extra bases as well - so using something with all extra base hits is probably more appropriate than HR alone.
But to that end, we don't really know what SDS is looking at for the Charisma series since it's not associated with a particular season. Everyone has a different way of viewing the content that SDS puts out, but it's probably more enjoyable if we accept the content and enjoy it for what it's worth.
-
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@Hikes83_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@Hikes83_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@UDVikings_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
Despite fewer HR, Carew has a higher slugging percentage than Morgan for their careers. Since Power in The Show isn't just for HR, you could argue that it makes sense for Carew to have slightly better power. Although when you break the Slugging into vs RHP and vs LHP splits, it is Carew (.444/.396) vs Morgan (.446/.388).
Regardless, when you look at slugging percentage instead of just HR, it's reasonable that the two of them have very similar power - especially because we aren't sure what season(s) the Charisma series cards are based on.
Now this guy provides an intelligent answer instead of illogical complaining from OP
My “complaining” is hardly “illogical”.
I saw the career SLUG numbers. But I’ve also seen clips and highlights of both these historical players…and I did more than just look at the SLUG and assume the guys with the higher % had more Power.
Do you even know how SLUG is calculated?
Because if you do, you’d understand WHY Carew has a SLUG that’s higher…and it’s NOT because he had more power.
He hit for a very high average. Over .350 in 5 seasons. He rarely hit under .300 and when he did, it was barely under it.
Morgan hit over .300 twice in his career. Career .271 hitter but he did walk a lot.
SLUG is just total bases divided by at bats. So…if someone hits for a much higher average and legs out a lot of triples…their SLUG is going to make it seem as though they have more Power….IF you blindly believe that SLUG% just equals power. It doesn’t…and can be skewed. Especially with players from a different era when the game was played differently.
Morgan had good speed too. Stole more bases than Carew. And himself piled up a high number of triples in a couple seasons.
The best example of this is Carew’s 1977 season where he SLUG’d a whipping .570.
He did so with only 14 HRs…a career high for him. He had 38 doubles and a league leading 16 triples though.
Oh…and he hit .388.
239 hits. 68 of them for extra bases.
But that means he SLUG’d .570 while still hitting 171 singles.
71.5% of his hits were singles.
I could do a similar breakdown for Morgan and you’d see a much lower average, and a higher percentage of hits being XBH…and most importantly…HRs.
Sorry…but we all play this game and we know that a higher POW rating means more HRs…not more triples.
But…I’m just here making totally “illogical” arguments.
To be fair, the only argument you threw in your original post is HRs. That’s all
Because that’s what POW translates to in this game.
268 is “slightly” larger than 92, no?
The guy above said they slugged about the same, thus the similar POW numbers.
The fact the game rewards power as HRs in the game just highlights how broken it is. Its been HR or outs in this game as long as I can remember. Just look at almost everyone’s stats. Almost all of your players will have more HRs than doubles and triples combined. That’s just how the game plays
-
@Hikes83_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@Hikes83_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@Hikes83_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@UDVikings_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
Despite fewer HR, Carew has a higher slugging percentage than Morgan for their careers. Since Power in The Show isn't just for HR, you could argue that it makes sense for Carew to have slightly better power. Although when you break the Slugging into vs RHP and vs LHP splits, it is Carew (.444/.396) vs Morgan (.446/.388).
Regardless, when you look at slugging percentage instead of just HR, it's reasonable that the two of them have very similar power - especially because we aren't sure what season(s) the Charisma series cards are based on.
Now this guy provides an intelligent answer instead of illogical complaining from OP
My “complaining” is hardly “illogical”.
I saw the career SLUG numbers. But I’ve also seen clips and highlights of both these historical players…and I did more than just look at the SLUG and assume the guys with the higher % had more Power.
Do you even know how SLUG is calculated?
Because if you do, you’d understand WHY Carew has a SLUG that’s higher…and it’s NOT because he had more power.
He hit for a very high average. Over .350 in 5 seasons. He rarely hit under .300 and when he did, it was barely under it.
Morgan hit over .300 twice in his career. Career .271 hitter but he did walk a lot.
SLUG is just total bases divided by at bats. So…if someone hits for a much higher average and legs out a lot of triples…their SLUG is going to make it seem as though they have more Power….IF you blindly believe that SLUG% just equals power. It doesn’t…and can be skewed. Especially with players from a different era when the game was played differently.
Morgan had good speed too. Stole more bases than Carew. And himself piled up a high number of triples in a couple seasons.
The best example of this is Carew’s 1977 season where he SLUG’d a whipping .570.
He did so with only 14 HRs…a career high for him. He had 38 doubles and a league leading 16 triples though.
Oh…and he hit .388.
239 hits. 68 of them for extra bases.
But that means he SLUG’d .570 while still hitting 171 singles.
71.5% of his hits were singles.
I could do a similar breakdown for Morgan and you’d see a much lower average, and a higher percentage of hits being XBH…and most importantly…HRs.
Sorry…but we all play this game and we know that a higher POW rating means more HRs…not more triples.
But…I’m just here making totally “illogical” arguments.
To be fair, the only argument you threw in your original post is HRs. That’s all
Because that’s what POW translates to in this game.
268 is “slightly” larger than 92, no?
The guy above said they slugged about the same, thus the similar POW numbers.
The fact the game rewards power as HRs in the game just highlights how broken it is. Its been HR or outs in this game as long as I can remember. Just look at almost everyone’s stats. Almost all of your players will have more HRs than doubles and triples combined. That’s just how the game plays
Slugging percentage is not a great way to measure what kind of power a hitter has. It’s a great stat…but if that’s what they are using to determine POW, that’s a problem.
The mode is littered with them though.
Look at the new Arraez card…he hit .384 with 1 HR in April and that card is going to be hitting a HR every other game for good hitters.
Or look at the Ozzie Smith card. His POW ratings are only slightly less than Carew and Morgan…yet his career SLUG was .328…career high was .383.
Meanwhile the Boggs card we got has low 40s in POW…? In 1988, he slugged .490 for the year…so I’m assuming his 2nd half was higher than that.
So…I guess SDS just randomly makes these ratings up? Tbh…that sort of feels like the best explanation.
-
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
So…I guess SDS just randomly makes these ratings up? Tbh…that sort of feels like the best explanation.
If they didn’t, every single lineup would be Ruth, Aaron, Sosa, Mays etc.
-
I saw them both play and giving Carew better power is like giving Gwynn amazing power because he had a great slugging percentage in 1994.
-
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
So…I guess SDS just randomly makes these ratings up? Tbh…that sort of feels like the best explanation.
If they didn’t, every single lineup would be Ruth, Aaron, Sosa, Mays etc.
Not if they made a game that didn’t only reward those who swing for HRs every time.
-
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
Really?
Is access to Baseball-reference.com blocked in the SDS offices by the IT guys?
Carew hit 92 HRs in his career...in 9315 ABs.
Morgan hit 268...in almost the same amount of ABs...9277.
Carew 86 POW R/73 POW L
Morgan 82 POW R/71 POW LBoth are Diamond 99 cards in the Charisma series...so I'm assuming these are supposed to represent these players at their PEAK.
How/why does the guy with 92 career HRs have better POW than the guy with 268?
I'll wait patiently for an answer from the staunch SDS defenders on this forum.
And for anyone who wants to say "who cares"...if they gave LS Arraez better POW ratings than LS Trout...you'd think that was stupid, no?
You make a good point but to play devils advocate let throw out some facts. Joe Morgan played in a band box. Riverfront was literally hitting down hill (stadium was actually on a downhill angle). It didn’t take much to have a ball get out of there especially in the summer. So what did Cincy do, build an even smaller ball park. Rod Carew played the majority of his career in Minnesota before the Metrodome was built. Metropolitan Stadium was not known for its ease to get out of especially early in the season for obvious reasons.
-
@killerpresence4_MLBTS said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
Really?
Is access to Baseball-reference.com blocked in the SDS offices by the IT guys?
Carew hit 92 HRs in his career...in 9315 ABs.
Morgan hit 268...in almost the same amount of ABs...9277.
Carew 86 POW R/73 POW L
Morgan 82 POW R/71 POW LBoth are Diamond 99 cards in the Charisma series...so I'm assuming these are supposed to represent these players at their PEAK.
How/why does the guy with 92 career HRs have better POW than the guy with 268?
I'll wait patiently for an answer from the staunch SDS defenders on this forum.
And for anyone who wants to say "who cares"...if they gave LS Arraez better POW ratings than LS Trout...you'd think that was stupid, no?
You make a good point but to play devils advocate let throw out some facts. Joe Morgan played in a band box. Three rivers was literally hitting down hill (stadium was actually on a downhill angle). It didn’t take much to have a ball get out of there especially in the summer. So what did Cincy do, build an even smaller ball park. Rod Carew played the majority of his career in Minnesota before the Metrodome was built. Metropolitan Stadium was not known for its ease to get out of especially early in the season for obvious reasons.
The stadium isn’t why Rod Carew wasn’t hitting homeruns. All your doing is assuming things that aren’t factual. His career slugging is better at this supposed drain of a stadium, Metropolitan Stadium, than his career mark. He had ZERO power and this card they gave him is fictional.
-
@fubar2k7_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@killerpresence4_MLBTS said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
Really?
Is access to Baseball-reference.com blocked in the SDS offices by the IT guys?
Carew hit 92 HRs in his career...in 9315 ABs.
Morgan hit 268...in almost the same amount of ABs...9277.
Carew 86 POW R/73 POW L
Morgan 82 POW R/71 POW LBoth are Diamond 99 cards in the Charisma series...so I'm assuming these are supposed to represent these players at their PEAK.
How/why does the guy with 92 career HRs have better POW than the guy with 268?
I'll wait patiently for an answer from the staunch SDS defenders on this forum.
And for anyone who wants to say "who cares"...if they gave LS Arraez better POW ratings than LS Trout...you'd think that was stupid, no?
You make a good point but to play devils advocate let throw out some facts. Joe Morgan played in a band box. Three rivers was literally hitting down hill (stadium was actually on a downhill angle). It didn’t take much to have a ball get out of there especially in the summer. So what did Cincy do, build an even smaller ball park. Rod Carew played the majority of his career in Minnesota before the Metrodome was built. Metropolitan Stadium was not known for its ease to get out of especially early in the season for obvious reasons.
The stadium isn’t why Rod Carew wasn’t hitting homeruns. All your doing is assuming things that aren’t factual. His career slugging is better at this supposed drain of a stadium, Metropolitan Stadium, than his career mark. He had ZERO power and this card they gave him is fictional.
No I’m not assuming anything. The difference in both those stadiums is stark. Riverfront Stadium was ridiculous. It was on a downhill slope. That is a fact. Hitting at the Met was far more challenging from a home run standpoint. And again I was merely playing devils advocate. I’m not saying Joe Morgan didn’t have more power, but to say the stadium didn’t have a little to do with both of those players homer outputs is just ignorant. I am saying Joe Morgan’s career homer output would have been less if he spent his career In Minnesota than where he spent his playing days in Cincy. Can you honestly say that Todd Helton’s career marks would be the same if hadn’t spent his entire career in Colorado. All advance metrics say that players had significantly higher outputs in Colorado than away from Colorado. So we can make calculations based on field metrics. That is why field independent metrics exist.
-
@killerpresence4_MLBTS said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@fubar2k7_PSN said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@killerpresence4_MLBTS said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
@BrikMahorn_XBL said in Why TF Does Rod Carew Have Better POW Ratings Than Joe Morgan?:
Really?
Is access to Baseball-reference.com blocked in the SDS offices by the IT guys?
Carew hit 92 HRs in his career...in 9315 ABs.
Morgan hit 268...in almost the same amount of ABs...9277.
Carew 86 POW R/73 POW L
Morgan 82 POW R/71 POW LBoth are Diamond 99 cards in the Charisma series...so I'm assuming these are supposed to represent these players at their PEAK.
How/why does the guy with 92 career HRs have better POW than the guy with 268?
I'll wait patiently for an answer from the staunch SDS defenders on this forum.
And for anyone who wants to say "who cares"...if they gave LS Arraez better POW ratings than LS Trout...you'd think that was stupid, no?
You make a good point but to play devils advocate let throw out some facts. Joe Morgan played in a band box. Three rivers was literally hitting down hill (stadium was actually on a downhill angle). It didn’t take much to have a ball get out of there especially in the summer. So what did Cincy do, build an even smaller ball park. Rod Carew played the majority of his career in Minnesota before the Metrodome was built. Metropolitan Stadium was not known for its ease to get out of especially early in the season for obvious reasons.
The stadium isn’t why Rod Carew wasn’t hitting homeruns. All your doing is assuming things that aren’t factual. His career slugging is better at this supposed drain of a stadium, Metropolitan Stadium, than his career mark. He had ZERO power and this card they gave him is fictional.
No I’m not assuming anything. The difference in both those stadiums is stark. Riverfront Stadium was ridiculous. It was on a downhill slope. That is a fact. Hitting at the Met was far more challenging from a home run standpoint. And again I was merely playing devils advocate. I’m not saying Joe Morgan didn’t have more power, but to say the stadium didn’t have a little to do with both of those players homer outputs is just ignorant. I am saying Joe Morgan’s career homer output would have been less if he spent his career In Minnesota than where he spent his playing days in Cincy. Can you honestly say that Todd Helton’s career marks would be the same if hadn’t spent his entire career in Colorado. All advance metrics say that players had significantly higher outputs in Colorado than away from Colorado. So we can make calculations based on field metrics. That is why field independent metrics exist.
Morgan only spent 8 of his 22 seasons in Cincinnati first of all and played about 600 of 2600 games in that home stadium.
