Baseballs are white. That is all.
hegone44_PSN
Posts
-
-
@Maverick31762 said in Your 5 most wanted SS cards still missing:
@DriveByTrucker17 said in Your 5 most wanted SS cards still missing:
@SefarR said in Your 5 most wanted SS cards still missing:
@Maverick31762 said in Your 5 most wanted SS cards still missing:
@SefarR said in Your 5 most wanted SS cards still missing:
@Maverick31762 said in Your 5 most wanted SS cards still missing:
@MiKySaK said in Your 5 most wanted SS cards still missing:
@Maverick31762 said in Your 5 most wanted SS cards still missing:
@SefarR said in Your 5 most wanted SS cards still missing:
@Maverick31762 said in Your 5 most wanted SS cards still missing:
I will also add that all star appearances, RBI, homers, OPS, steals, MVP voting are ALL flawed. However, I am not depending on one stat to make or break my case. When Carter is better in 90% of stats and watching th em both in action one was better. Plus in terms of baseball history he is more relevant.
Okay, one last time.
WAR is a comprehensive stat that takes into consideration offense and defense and calculates how valuable you are compared to a replacement level player.
None of your offensive stats take into consideration defense.
Overall Gordon was the better player and to argue otherwise is simply ignorant.
WAR is a flawed stat. Even the founder of it Will James will admit as much. It’s goal is to be comprehend it it is not for more reasons than I can state. Google flaw in WAR stat or if you have a good understanding of statistics (not baseball stats) but actual statistics find out how WAR is made and the underlying assumptions and behind the math decisions you can poke holes throughout.
Alex Gordon played LF literally the position with the least defensive relevance. Stop acting like he was a SS he was actually a bad 3B with a good arm converted to LF. Dude had maybe 3 high quality above average seasons. If you can point to more please tell me. MOST of his seasons were garbage in a garbage team
To say that anyone could put up his Toronto numbers well he was the 4 hitter on. Steam with 2 HOF. Alomar and aging Winfeild. Are saying he is a product of Grubrr and Olerud. Also he was putting up the same number in Cleveland Yes he swing at everything and didn’t hit for a high average. He also stole bases and didn’t K a lot for a power hitter. I am not saying he was the greatest ever. Saying he was very good and better than Gordon.
Man after had a 9 season stretch of 30 homers 100 RBI and like 20 steals. Gordon wished he had one season like that.You are incredible. I bet you are one of those guys who thinks Earth is flat. Another interesting thread destroyed by you and your flawed “logic”. Congrats!
Back to the topic. Pretty much the only player I am waiting for is SS Gossage. I don’t think anyone else will make my team. Maybe starting pitchers Hersheiser, Vida, Newhouser..
Ok troll if you are going to talk [censored] please explain my flawed logic. Nobody as insulting anyone. Not sure why you are bringing that douche energy. Here are the points to my argument please point to the one that is flawed
-
You should not use a single stat to determine players ability. You should use multiple stats. This is a premise used by real life statisticians
-
WAR is a very flawed stat. The inventor of WAR says as much. There are many poor assumptions. I am not alone in this MLB doesn’t use the stat. You can’t find an incentive based contract that uses it either.
-
Carter is better than Gordon in every offensive stat but WAR. By other less objective measures it still informative measures like all Star appearances and MVP finishes he is superior. These are facts
-
I concede that Gordon is a better fielder. However, I am saying that given LF is the least important defensive position that it doesn’t rally add to the case. Especially because most corner OF are there primarily because their offense. I don’t see how the statement is even controversial.
The point is WAR, even if it is a singular stat, is better than the stats you're referring to (I.e. RBIs (meaningless), SBs (almost as meaningless), All star appearances (utterly meaningless)).
OPS-wise Carter and Gordon are easily comparable with neither having elite-production seasons and both ranging seasonally in the 700s or low 800s).
Defensively they arent remotely comparable.
You're missing the point that it is extremely difficult to provide additional wins into WAR and dWAR as a left fielder, but Gordon did. Meanwhile, Carter actually played under replacement level and actually cost his team games with his defense...
Why do you think Keith Hernandez' career dWAR is 1.3? Because although he was a great fielder, it is very difficult to provide additional defensive wins as a 1B. The fact that Gordon was able to produce 8.6 defensive wins based on dWAR as a left fielder is actually very impressive and shows that he actually had a net-positive impact there (unlike Carter).
Lastly, Bill James (not Will) is not the creator of WAR but win shares. He criticises WAR sure but how about you go to him and present your analysis between Carter and Gordon based on RBIs, stolen bases and all star appearances... Wonder what he would say to that....
We just disagree about the use of WAR as a singular stat. I think that ANY singular stat RBI, homers, BA etc is not as good as a full statistical analysis. I am not using ONE stat. When triangulating the data which any statistician on the planet would say is a better method of analyzing data than looking at any one stat you get a better idea of the player. Here are some facts
- Carter is better stats in the following:
Homeruns (career, single season, per AB),
RBI (career, single season, per AB),
Steals (career, single season, per AB),
hits (career, single season, per AB),
Triples (career, single season, per AB),
Runs (career, single season, per AB),
BA (career)
Slugging (career, single season) - number of .500 SLG season
OPS (career, single season) - number of .800 OPS seasons
OPS+ (career)
All-Star selections
Top 10 MVP selections-
Gordon played a great LF and a horrible 3B
-
WAR is a not a perfect stat. Here are a few articles that touch on it
WAR article
lThis WAR article touches other aspects of it that might directly impact this comparison
Here is an example of how BAD a stat WAR can be and you can find TONS when you start to look. Take a look at 1994 Carter
G AB R. H HR. RBI. SB BA. OBP. SLG. OPS
1994 34 TOR AL 111 435 70 118 27 103 11. .271 .317 .524 .841I think its fair to say that a season like this that got him a top 10 MVP finish and an all star selection is not something that any typical replacement player could have pulled off. Clearly baseball people realize it was a great season thus the All Star selection and MVP votes. Those are good numbers. But according to WAR this won't even get you an extra win as the WAR for this season was 0.7. This is in large part due to his -1.6 dWAR. Wow such a bad dWAR you would think he was making tons of errors. Nope only 2 errors. So I guess he was missing balls? Really? won't get into how that is measured in WAR but it is VERY subjective.
Realistically, I'm not even writing this to you, but the other forum members, because I know nothing can make you change your mind.
Here is how baseball reference calculates defensive WAR:
W-L% = ((League Runs/Game / 2)^(Runs/Game involving Player))/((League Runs/Game / 2)^(Runs/Game involving Player) + ((League Runs/Game / 2)- Player Defensive Runs)^(Runs/Game involving Player))
DWAA = (W-L% - .5) * Games Played
DWRSE = Player Defensive Runs / ((2 * (league Runs/Game)^.715) - (2 * (Runs per Game involving Player)^.715))
DWAR = DWAA + DWRSEHow much do you think this has to do with how many errors Carter committed?
How valuable do you think a player that never commits an error but covers an area the size of a basketball is to a team?
You've decided that WAR is somehow an arbitrary stat but how about we put this thing to a vote here? How many people do you think will vote for Carter?
WAR tells much more about a player than any of those base stats used together. Gordon’s career is better than Carter’s, and only a true moron would think otherwise.
Driver when you don't have a good argument the classic move of unintelligent people is to name call. I disagree with Sefar, but he is smart enough to have an intelligent argument without an insult. But when we last had a WAR debate I asked if you have EVER taken more than 6 credits in Math or statistics, if you have EVER taken a undergraduate or masters level statistics class. If you have have even 60 college credits. I also asked if you have ever had to use stats or develop statistical analysis in ANY professional manner. I can answer YES to all of those and to me that is not a high bar. So before you call someone a moron you should look in the mirror.
Hopefully I have enough college math credit to qualify for a conversation about baseball stats, but I digress...
Most people would argue, as you have, that Joe Carter was a far superior hitter, and that offensive superiority over Gordon outweighs Gordon's defensive superiority over Carter. Fair enough. I've seen both these guys play and, based on my memories, I'd have thought that too. However, our memories/eyes lie all the time. Here's a slash line comparison:
Gordon: .258/.339/.413/.752
Carter: .259/.306/.464/.770Now defense. By ANY metric available Gordon is the far superior defensive player. Fangraphs Def rating difference is +27.4 for Gordon to -175.7 for Carter. Baseball Ref dWAR is +8.6 for Gordon to -15.7 for Carter.
So, to recap, OPS is essentially a pick-em, especially since Gordon has a decided edge in the most important offensive category (OBP). Defense is a landslide in Gordon's favor. That's why the difference in WAR is pretty dramatic.
So if I'm an AL team and can DH Carter then maybe I'll take him. But if he has to play a COF position, Gordon will help my team more in the long run. Bottom line is Joe Carter was not nearly as good as we remember.
-
-
- Write down the specifics of every showdown you do. Which spot in the order was up when it started, etc. Really helps make repeats easier - there are guides online too if you google.
- Pick power hitters - because there are tons of perks that increase their contact level. Even all-or-nothing sluggers like Jorge Soler are better than contact hitters.
- Only choose pitchers when forced - you'll generally only really need a silver starter and a silver reliever. Exception - Ohtani and McKay because they can hit, and they make pitching missions easy.
- Don't gamble on the bases.
- Don't be afraid to bunt guys over if you only need a run or two. Double plays can kill the entire moment.
- Get heart attack perks whenever possible - because you're losing in all the hardest moments, including the showdowns.
- If you're swinging too much, take a strike. Helps wear down the pitcher anyways.
-
Don't like the DH for a couple reasons:
- I think players should have to play the field to hit. If you want the benefit of Nelson Cruz's bat, then you need to live with his defense. Players don't get to be defense-only so I don't think you should be able to hit only.
- Don't really care about the double switch stuff, but I think more the other way - there are pitchers who can hit, and they should be able to benefit from that skillset.
I guess I just don't like specialization, and no DH minimizes specialization in baseball, and forces players to be more well-rounded to produce.
-
It can be defensed, so it’s fair.
-
The front door/backdoor cutter is your friend. Also the cutter in on the hands like Mo used to do is your friend. Don't think of it like a slider because it's not.
-
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@Maverick31762 said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@hegone44 said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
Go look at Zimmerman and Neil Walkers Accomplishments and then Go look at Joe Carters careers. Look at the MVP voting, the AS appearances the awards over a career mean nothing you you people who only believe that a players career is solely based of War which is based on a formula and not how a player actually played.
You dont know how to use this site. You arent responding to anyone. Anyways nobody is basing anything off war. Carter wasnt thay great outside of war. Zimmerman has a better OPS.
Again what has Zimmerman done, How many AS games how many top 10 or 20 MVP voting. You really think Ryan Zimmerman was a better player cause WAR tells you that. This is laughable
Is everyone on this site just brain dead? Can you read dude? For now the second time Zimmerman has a better career OPS.......thats not WAR. Thats a traditional stat. It is laughable that you cant read or use google
When you will get it that comparing Zimmerman to Carter proved my point that WAR is overrated.
I hope you are just trolling at this point. Ryan zimmerman is the better player by traditional stats as well, as I have pointed out many times now
Not even close at all, Accomplishments will show that.
Dude. You are slow. Are you really going to use all star appearances as a measure to who is better? Is starlin castro better than kris bryant?
Since WAR is to much for your brain lets use traditional stats.
BA - Ryan
OBP- ryan
Slugging - ryanThe dude has a better Batting average, on base and slugging. What even is the argument anymore? Ryan zimmerman is the better player and its not just WAR that tells us that. You didnt do very well in school did you?
Actually dude has been pretty clear what he's getting at, and you're too slow to hear it. Here's the point:
I think people remember Joe Carter as fondly as they do because of context. Think about it this way:
-
He was the cleanup hitter on back-to-back champion Jays teams.
-
He was the best RF in the American League at the time. Canseco was better, but not by 92-93 thanks to injuries, Winfield was a DH now, and nobody else was close. The NL the only one clearly better was Tony Gwynn. Could make an argument for a young Larry Walker/Dave Justice, but they were really young at the time.
-
Also remember he came up big in the WS for the Blue Jays. He had 11 RBI in 12 WS games those 2 years, including the walkoff homer that won the '93 series.
Put into context, people watching baseball between 1985-1995 thought Joe Carter was a great player. Not sure-fire HOF material, but borderline.
Can you ever even make something resembling an argument that Ryan Zimmerman:
- Received any real MVP consideration in any year?
- Meant much of anything to a team that won anything?
- Would be considered anywhere close to the best player at his position in the NL, or top 2-3 in the MLB?
The Jays, who were already good, traded away Fred McGriff and Tony Fernandez (McGriff was great, and Fernandez was a good hitter, really fast, and an elite SS), in their primes, to get Joe Carter. That says a lot for how the MLB viewed that player in 1990. Zimmerman has always been viewed as a good player, but not a difference maker. Joe Carter was. No context when you just look at numbers of players who played 25 years apart.
Id like you to send me the people who thought a 306 on base was borderline HOF.
I can make a resembling argument that Zimmerman was a significantly better hitter by all metrics. The OPS isnt all that close. And yes Zim was 100% considered a top tier third baseman in his prime.
We are sitting here arguing about a 770 ops hitter. Just because he played on good teams and hit a cool home run makes him better than someone who is clearly better by all metrics AND traditional stats. Better average on base and slugging. And some arent even close. Thats Weird.
I actually agree with most of what you said, I just disagree in my opinion Carter was better, We just look at the stats differently and the 306 is not much lower than Zimmermans 343. I will take the 400 plus 300 plus HR the less K rate per plate appearance and Carters 771 to Zimmerman's 818 not much of a difference and over 200 more Rs, almost 200 more SB. SlG is very close, Zimmerman had more BB. I do not think Carter is a HOF. I do think what puts him there is the WS and playoff performances.
Bruh. A 306 to a 343 on base is HUGEEEEE. Once again he had 2000 more ABs. Thats why his counting stats are better. So yes you would take a 771 OPS to a 818 OPS, which is just insane and makes no sense.
You saying you will take carter because of what he did in the playoffs is actually a real correct arguement. Because during the regular season across their entire careers zim was the better hitter
Go take Carters 7 best seasons and put them next to Zimmermans 7 best. It ain’t even close
You are right lol. Its not close.
Full seasons only
Carters best 5 OPS - 849, 841, 833, 808, 802
Zim- 930, 899, 888, 824, 824
You were correct. It wasnt close. This dude you love so much never saw a OPS above 850 for a full season.
Dude there is more to a player stat then OPS get off the OPS [censored] already, How many WS did the A's win building teams around OPS? 0 again 0 and again 0 every year since Money Ball Model arrived
Furthermore nobody talked about OPS until the last 15 years. When Joe Carter was in his prime, players weren't told that "a walk is as good as a hit" unless there was nobody on base. The best hitter, arguably, in the AL in the late 80's was Kirby Puckett, a notoriously free swinger. Tony Gwynn didn't walk either. Or Ryne Sandberg...
Using OPS to compare players across eras is like using QB rating to say that Tony Romo was better than Johnny Unitas. Johnny U wasn't held to that standard, rules were different, etc.
This entire thread basically comes down to a simple point - in his day Joe Carter was considered a great player. In their day, guys like Neil Walker, Ryan Zimmerman, and others I've seen referenced were/are not, and using 2020 statistical models, which are flawed to begin with, to evaluate the greatness of past players just doesn't make sense period.
-
-
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@hegone44 said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@hegone44 said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@Maverick31762 said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@hegone44 said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@GrandpaShaft said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
@dbarmonstar said in Joe Carter most underrated player:
Go look at Zimmerman and Neil Walkers Accomplishments and then Go look at Joe Carters careers. Look at the MVP voting, the AS appearances the awards over a career mean nothing you you people who only believe that a players career is solely based of War which is based on a formula and not how a player actually played.
You dont know how to use this site. You arent responding to anyone. Anyways nobody is basing anything off war. Carter wasnt thay great outside of war. Zimmerman has a better OPS.
Again what has Zimmerman done, How many AS games how many top 10 or 20 MVP voting. You really think Ryan Zimmerman was a better player cause WAR tells you that. This is laughable
Is everyone on this site just brain dead? Can you read dude? For now the second time Zimmerman has a better career OPS.......thats not WAR. Thats a traditional stat. It is laughable that you cant read or use google
When you will get it that comparing Zimmerman to Carter proved my point that WAR is overrated.
I hope you are just trolling at this point. Ryan zimmerman is the better player by traditional stats as well, as I have pointed out many times now
Not even close at all, Accomplishments will show that.
Dude. You are slow. Are you really going to use all star appearances as a measure to who is better? Is starlin castro better than kris bryant?
Since WAR is to much for your brain lets use traditional stats.
BA - Ryan
OBP- ryan
Slugging - ryanThe dude has a better Batting average, on base and slugging. What even is the argument anymore? Ryan zimmerman is the better player and its not just WAR that tells us that. You didnt do very well in school did you?
Actually dude has been pretty clear what he's getting at, and you're too slow to hear it. Here's the point:
I think people remember Joe Carter as fondly as they do because of context. Think about it this way:
-
He was the cleanup hitter on back-to-back champion Jays teams.
-
He was the best RF in the American League at the time. Canseco was better, but not by 92-93 thanks to injuries, Winfield was a DH now, and nobody else was close. The NL the only one clearly better was Tony Gwynn. Could make an argument for a young Larry Walker/Dave Justice, but they were really young at the time.
-
Also remember he came up big in the WS for the Blue Jays. He had 11 RBI in 12 WS games those 2 years, including the walkoff homer that won the '93 series.
Put into context, people watching baseball between 1985-1995 thought Joe Carter was a great player. Not sure-fire HOF material, but borderline.
Can you ever even make something resembling an argument that Ryan Zimmerman:
- Received any real MVP consideration in any year?
- Meant much of anything to a team that won anything?
- Would be considered anywhere close to the best player at his position in the NL, or top 2-3 in the MLB?
The Jays, who were already good, traded away Fred McGriff and Tony Fernandez (McGriff was great, and Fernandez was a good hitter, really fast, and an elite SS), in their primes, to get Joe Carter. That says a lot for how the MLB viewed that player in 1990. Zimmerman has always been viewed as a good player, but not a difference maker. Joe Carter was. No context when you just look at numbers of players who played 25 years apart.
Id like you to send me the people who thought a 306 on base was borderline HOF.
I can make a resembling argument that Zimmerman was a significantly better hitter by all metrics. The OPS isnt all that close. And yes Zim was 100% considered a top tier third baseman in his prime.
We are sitting here arguing about a 770 ops hitter. Just because he played on good teams and hit a cool home run makes him better than someone who is clearly better by all metrics AND traditional stats. Better average on base and slugging. And some arent even close. Thats Weird.
I actually agree with most of what you said, I just disagree in my opinion Carter was better, We just look at the stats differently and the 306 is not much lower than Zimmermans 343. I will take the 400 plus 300 plus HR the less K rate per plate appearance and Carters 771 to Zimmerman's 818 not much of a difference and over 200 more Rs, almost 200 more SB. SlG is very close, Zimmerman had more BB. I do not think Carter is a HOF. I do think what puts him there is the WS and playoff performances.
Bruh. A 306 to a 343 on base is HUGEEEEE. Once again he had 2000 more ABs. Thats why his counting stats are better. So yes you would take a 771 OPS to a 818 OPS, which is just insane and makes no sense.
You saying you will take carter because of what he did in the playoffs is actually a real correct arguement. Because during the regular season across their entire careers zim was the better hitter
Go take Carters 7 best seasons and put them next to Zimmermans 7 best. It ain’t even close
You are right lol. Its not close.
Full seasons only
Carters best 5 OPS - 849, 841, 833, 808, 802
Zim- 930, 899, 888, 824, 824
You were correct. It wasnt close. This dude you love so much never saw a OPS above 850 for a full season.
Dude there is more to a player stat then OPS get off the OPS [censored] already, How many WS did the A's win building teams around OPS? 0 again 0 and again 0 every year since Money Ball Model arrived
Furthermore nobody talked about OPS until the last 15 years. When Joe Carter was in his prime, players weren't told that "a walk is as good as a hit" unless there was nobody on base. The best hitter, arguably, in the AL in the late 80's was Kirby Puckett, a notoriously free swinger. Tony Gwynn didn't walk either. Or Ryne Sandberg...
Using OPS to compare players across eras is like using QB rating to say that Tony Romo was better than Johnny Unitas. Johnny U wasn't held to that standard, rules were different, etc.
This entire thread basically comes down to a simple point - in his day Joe Carter was considered a great player. In their day, guys like Neil Walker, Ryan Zimmerman, and others I've seen referenced were/are not, and using 2020 statistical models, which are flawed to begin with, to evaluate the greatness of past players just doesn't make sense period.
Those three guys all still had a better OPS than carter. tony was at 850 as a slap hitter. Very good. Sandberg had a 340 on base, tony was almost at 390. Just a tad better than 305.
I dont get how power and on base numbers cant be used to value Hitters throughout history. But sure.
Neil walker no. But zim was pretty [censored] good for awhile. He just played on bad Nats teams.
Once again not sure how power and on base is flawed when judging a hitter.
WAR and the like are flawed because they take each individual game/situation out of their proper context, and place seasons in computers as if they're played that way. They aren't.
Also, my point was you cannot use the statistics we use today to evaluate hitters from the past. They played in an era when power hitters like Joe Carter were "paid to hit homeruns", strikeouts were embarrassing, and the batting title was the most prestigious individual achievement in baseball after MVPs. That's the world Joe Carter played in.
Guys like Ryan Zimmerman play in an era where walks are considered the same as hits, strikeouts are just another out, and OBP trumps BA. Completely different methodology, which trickles all the way down to the way the players build their swing techniques.
Again, football is a good comparison. Today we judge QBs by QB rating. Johnny Unitas had a career QB rating of 78, a stat that nobody used when he played. Every single QB had a rating higher than his career rating last season. Are we then to say that every single QB playing today is greater than Johnny Unitas?
That's why the only thing that makes sense is to take players within the context of when they played, because the game changes completely over time - and baseball has changed more in the last 15 years than it changed in the 100 years that came before it.
The best players have the best WAR. Doesnt seem very flawed.
Hitting for power and getting on base has always mattered.
Yeah every QB today is better than johnny unitas.
Number 1 is dumb because every single website/stat publication has a different calculation for WAR...so that in and of itself makes it scientifically off.
Number 2 is dumb because players were taught to hit aggressively not to work counts/draw walks/get to the bullpen. That's why it was so innovative when the Yankees, Red Sox, and A's began using that strategy and winning with it. That's where moneyball came from for God's sake.
If you think that every QB playing today is greater than Johnny Unitas was than you know less about football than you seem to about baseball.
You're just trolling at this point.
-
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Molitor is a Brewer:
@joester33 said in Molitor is a Brewer:
I agree Just like Mike Piazza will allways be a dodger to me
In defense of the OP, Molitor was certainly known as a Brewer. Piazza is a Met to everyone but Dodgers fans
Not to anybody who watched him play with the Dodgers. He hit .360 with 40 bombs one year with the Dodgers, his best years were with LA. He was on better teams in NY.
-
Guys on here are making fun, but OP is 100% correct. Gagne's vulcan change wasn't 69 MPH, his curveball was. Same with guys like Kershaw, Grienke, Oswalt. The very nature of what a changeup is, and how one throws it, makes it impossible to achieve -20 while maintaining deception. If a pitcher who throws 96 MPH had a 76 MPH change it would either (a) have a lot of top spin (curveball) or result from motion changes. It's just a video game, but there's 0% chance that Tom Seaver had 96/76 with deception. In real life he either didn't throw 96, had a faster change, or both.
-
Two things make it more effective, 1 is like real life the other is not:
- The cutter has less top spin and is, therefore, thrown harder and with less movement BUT the movement generally happens later. A slider looks like a breaking ball because it breaks earlier.
- In this game, the cutter for some reason looks a lot slower than it is. Hard to explain but it does. So having a nasty cutter in the game has the same effect as having a great change up with movement.
-
I get as irritated as anyone with RNG stuff, but I'd say the pinpoint pitching is fantastic. I just think it's a little too easy to get perfect/perfect. I don't think people understand that pitching is a part of baseball with very little randomness involved, as opposed a hitting. I bet Greg Maddux would say that if his mechanics, release point, grip, etc all were exactly as he planned them to be in a given pitch that he could throw the ball where he wanted with his eyes closed. The way the game is now, more wild pitchers (Ryan, Feller, etc) won't throw the same "dot" on a perfect/perfect that Greg Maddux or Pedro Martinez do, and that's as it should be. Perfect/perfect for pitchers has the same effect that it does on hitters, with the exception that even when hitters square the ball up there are still fielders who could get in the way. That's not true of pitching - pitching is 100% pitcher execution.
Also, keep in mind we are all using prime versions of all-time great pitchers and/or overpowered prospects, all of whom would dominate our lineups if they executed the real-life versions of the "perfect/perfect" input on 95% of their pitches.
The biggest issue with the pitcher/hitter interface is by far the sinker I think. It tunnels with the curveball, because it goes up out of the pitcher's hand in the game and that's messed up. If they'd tunnel it with the fastball, like real life, then it wouldn't feel like we're hitting 100 mph curveballs.
-
@chestnuts20_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@hegone44_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@dewrock_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
@go4stros25_psn said in Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever":
Lol yankee fans "but but babe Ruth, but but but in 1920...."
Babe Ruth played 20 years before Jackie Robison broke the color barrier. The talent in the league today is unreal. Might be baseball blasphemy, but I wouldn't be shocked if babe Ruth was just a run of the mill DH in today's game.
Athletes in every sport have gotten bigger, stronger, and faster since we started tracking these things. Why would mlb pitchers be any different? I know there were probably a few guys back them that could probably hit the low 90s, but call me crazy. I just don't think the average pitcher, Whitey Willabe McGroover, fresh off the farm was bringing a 97+ to the plate like the majority of pitchers are today.
Ruth was the best of his time. He has left behind one of, if not the biggest, legacies in professional sports. That's his place. Can't compare players 100 years apart
And yet we have stats that do just that.
Yeah, but where the flaw lies in comparing across eras is that WAR uses stats compiled by an individual player and then weighs them across numerous factors. It cannot take into account the players who are missing. Nobody can argue that the 1920's weren't significantly inferior to the 1940's and 1950's let alone today. WAR actually does a very poor job comparing across eras, that's what things like ERA+ and OPS+ are for...but even those stats cannot take into account the overall quality of a league.
You don't understand WAR... WAR greatly benefits players that played in the past. The fact that Babe was the BEST of his time by far should hint that his WAR would be dramatically increased.
Actually I do understand it pretty well thank you, and this article made my point precisely. Before 1950, the league was nothing compared to its post-1950 counterpart. You cannot use WAR to compare across eras very well, because in the end it uses a player's statistics to come up with that number. And if those statistics are compiled against inferior competition there's no way to accurately account for that.
-
Here's the thing though, it doesn't really make sense for a pitcher's ratings to have much, if any, effect on outcomes. The pitcher's ratings should make it increasingly more difficult to achieve high hit probability inputs. Tiny PCI's, sensitive zones within the PCI where achieving good or squared contact is hard, that sort of thing. Fact is, in this game, a good/squared input will almost always result in 100mph+ exit velocity...with almost every hitter. In the major leagues, hitters hit .620 last year on batted balls at or above 100mph, and in the low-mid .200's below 90. This game doesn't come close to reflecting that reality. Should hitters line out - of course. Should they crush ground balls at people, of course. But not more than half the time. I highly doubt I have more 14/15 hits than I have 14/15 outs.
-
In retrospect we probably all should've taken Chipper Jones, but that 87 Kendall was good too. I took Henderson because it's Rickey f'ing Henderson, and he turned out only ok in my opinion.
-
..or even if the "List on Marketplace" option would take me to a screen where I can see his values before determining what value to put myself, that'd be greatly helpful.
-
Many have been made available through choice packs, which means they're in the market. I did a lot of flipping, buying, to get Honus. Not sure one can get him without doing that.
-
@SefarR said in Painting corners:
@Maverick31762 said in Painting corners:
@SefarR said in Painting corners:
@Maverick31762 said in Painting corners:
@SefarR said in Painting corners:
What I have noticed, and you may call this a conspiracy if you like, that it is much easier to paint the corners when playing vs. players with similar or better records than yourself. The worse record your opponent has, the more you are going to be wild and miss your pitches, even on perfect input.
That is insane and baseless. You may as well say that you do better when you are wearing your pink panties.
So you say, but you saying it doesn't make it any less true. You believe what you want and I'll continue believing what I believe. This is another topic where we will never reach an agreement and that's how it'll stay.
Cool, so keep believing the baseless idea that you hit better with pink pantries on.
Btw, I think your WARP (won above replament panties) is highest with the pink ones
Btw you can’t get less true than totally false. So whether I said it or not in maintains that value. So I guess we agree on that
Considering how much you claim to know about this game, and how you claim that pitcher confidence is everything, it is certainly funny that your knowledge does not appear to translate into success in the game. You would think that if your stance about the non-existence of RNG (effectively) or the lack of any type of equalisation was correct, you would be able to - with your know-how and skill-set - dominate the entire landscape of competitive MLB the show.
Mr. 617... or should I call you Mr. WAR is a bad stat... or Mr. Last Word?
Jesus you guys should get married. Seems like every thread turns into this Maverick guy arguing with this SafarR guy.
Anyways, I'm with Maverick on this one. There's no way that the game has some invisible handicapping system whereby your pitchers are more likely to hang pitches and your hitters are more likely to line out, just because you're playing an opponent with an inferior record. That wouldn't even make sense. My guess is that when you know you're up against someone good, you know you need to focus more so you play better. Seems far more likely than there being some hidden handicapping written into the coding somehow.
-
Note to self - use Felipe Vazquez for the freebies
-
Baez by a mile.
Add the option to customize the ball color
Your 5 most wanted SS cards still missing
Showdown tips
BREAKING NEWS
Bunting is a valide tactic
Cutters
Joe Carter most underrated player
Joe Carter most underrated player
Molitor is a Brewer
Seaver has a 20 mph gap between FB and change
Can anyone explain a cutter?
PINPOINT pitching ruined this game
Ohtani's "Greatest Season Ever"
The Equalizer aka rubberbanding
Original Diamond Choices
Listing cards while opening packs
All-Star and Hardware
Painting corners
It took all of two innings
SS Barry Larkin vs Finest Javier Baez..