He is at least in the HOF. As for the legend part, I'll have to step away from that. It was posted both as any and as legends so my bad, I'll get off that and get off criticizing his staff.
Finals csrupp vs. quest4#9
- Thread starter DraftCat
- Start date
Yes, statistical comparisons. Otherwise, just let us know when players have evolved enough to compete against current players so we all know where to start drafting.
I don’t even think they were the two best teams in this, if I’m being honest. You could have made a solid argument for all 16 teams, but overall people felt these two were the best and that says something regardless of how I feel.
I for one think there's plenty of guys who would be good in today's game. But when I see a picture of Mel Ott, it's fair to ask if he could have competed in today's game, let alone have been the best player in today's game. The stats @csrupp was posting show him as almost double the player of Trout, who will end up as one of the GOATS. Mel Ott isn't close to that.
At least if we are going to give old timers a bump for not having evolved physically, then let's look at metrics in their best season, not over the course of their career. I think I could get a career WAR of 9.9 (Acuna's career total) if you give me enough games.
At least if we are going to give old timers a bump for not having evolved physically, then let's look at metrics in their best season, not over the course of their career. I think I could get a career WAR of 9.9 (Acuna's career total) if you give me enough games.
Last edited:
Yeah, when I looked at this, I felt several teams could make a good case, as evidenced by winning 10-9 last round. It's quite subjective. I was impressed with how many people drafted well tbh. Plenty of baseball knowledge here.
Yea and I had a blast doing it. Swear to god I’d love if we could send at least $5 bucks a piece if we wanted to Norse. He deserves something for keeping these going
Single season WAR comparison between they 2 teams:
Morgan: 11 Robinson: 9.7
Jackson: 9.5 Trout: 10.5
Mantle: 11.3 Griffey: 9.7
Ott: 8.9 McGwire: 7.5
Foxx: 10.1 Sosa: 10.3
Thome: 7.5 Martinez: 7
Fisk: 7.3 Posey: 7.6
Lindor: 7.8 Reese: 7.4
Bellinger: 9.1 Hamilton: 8.2
Acuna: 5.7 Renteria: 5.6
Bregman: 9.1 Realmuto: 4.5
Tom Seaver: 10.6 Ryan: 7.8
Kid Nichols: 12.9 Gooden: 12.2
Blyleven: 9.7 Guidry: 9.6
Cone: 7.2 Arrieta: 8.3
Smith: 4.8 Gagne: 3.7
Starting line up combined WAR:
73.4 - 69.7
Bench WAR:
23.9 - 18.3
Starting Pitchers:
40.4 - 37.9
Closers:
4.8 - 3.7
Combined team WAR:
142.5 - 129.6
Morgan: 11 Robinson: 9.7
Jackson: 9.5 Trout: 10.5
Mantle: 11.3 Griffey: 9.7
Ott: 8.9 McGwire: 7.5
Foxx: 10.1 Sosa: 10.3
Thome: 7.5 Martinez: 7
Fisk: 7.3 Posey: 7.6
Lindor: 7.8 Reese: 7.4
Bellinger: 9.1 Hamilton: 8.2
Acuna: 5.7 Renteria: 5.6
Bregman: 9.1 Realmuto: 4.5
Tom Seaver: 10.6 Ryan: 7.8
Kid Nichols: 12.9 Gooden: 12.2
Blyleven: 9.7 Guidry: 9.6
Cone: 7.2 Arrieta: 8.3
Smith: 4.8 Gagne: 3.7
Starting line up combined WAR:
73.4 - 69.7
Bench WAR:
23.9 - 18.3
Starting Pitchers:
40.4 - 37.9
Closers:
4.8 - 3.7
Combined team WAR:
142.5 - 129.6
Starting lineup:
Even using highest single season WAR, I still have the best lineup.
Bench:
Switching to single season WAR gives me far and away the best bench.
Starting Pitchers:
Even using highest single season WAR, I still have far and away the best staff. I would have the best starter in games 1,2,3,5,6,7. That's massive in a 7 game series.
Closers:
My team still has a big advantage here.
Conclusion:
My team has the better lineup, starting staff, bench and closer.
Even using highest single season WAR, I still have the best lineup.
Bench:
Switching to single season WAR gives me far and away the best bench.
Starting Pitchers:
Even using highest single season WAR, I still have far and away the best staff. I would have the best starter in games 1,2,3,5,6,7. That's massive in a 7 game series.
Closers:
My team still has a big advantage here.
Conclusion:
My team has the better lineup, starting staff, bench and closer.
Last edited:
If you are open to changing your mind, take a look at my single season WAR post above. I have the best starter in games 1,2,3,5,6,7. I have the best lineup, the best bench, and the best closer.
In dead serious when I say it’s neck and neck for me in this matchup. If quest can come back with something that counters this in a way I agree with, I could still reconsider
Haha now we are talking. Things look quite a bit different when you don't use full career. Kudos to you for going to find all that. Makes me want to vote on you just for the effort. ( Being serious not sarcastic).
As you can see, at minimum now we are looking at a nice matchup, not some blowout lol.
The point I will argue on WAR. The stat isn't foolproof.
Closer- You state your team has a big metrical advantage and according to WAR yes. But realistically it just doesn't make sense.
Lee Smith 1983 the year you used for him- ERA- 1.65 SAVES- 29 LOSSES- 10
Eric Gagne - 2003 ERA- 1.2. SAVES 55 BLOWN SAVES 0. Cy Young Award Winner
The guy was perfect, literally the undisputed best season ever for a closer and your WAR argument suggests that Smith was better. He lost 10 games that year with just 29 saves.
I can go through player by player and find discrepancies on the WAR like this, but just wanted to highlight the first that caught my eye. It is not possible to have a closer advantage on a guy who went 55/55 with a 1.2 ERA.
Touche for all these stats you are gathering, but WAR is just not a perfect metric by any means and also takes a team's record into account. Nolan Ryan by any publication is one of the best pitchers ever, and is the MLB strikeout leader. His 7.8 WAR is simply not indicative of his real value to his team, because the team around him stunk. If your team doesn't win a lot of games, your WAR won't be good. Throw him on the same teams Seaver was on, and it's likely Ryan's WAR is higher.
Ryan had one season with a 1.69 ERA- absurd for a starting pitcher, and in that season his WAR was just 4.7 because the Rangers were bad.
Seaver on the flip side had an ERA of 1.76 in his best season, while his WAR was above 10. Why would you ever value a higher ERA?
Let's not understate Nolan Ryan's greatness. He had 5,714 strikeouts in his career. Your Seaver was actually 6th best ever in that regard and had just 3,640.
Lower ERA and more strikeouts, I know which one I'm taking...
As you can see, at minimum now we are looking at a nice matchup, not some blowout lol.
The point I will argue on WAR. The stat isn't foolproof.
Closer- You state your team has a big metrical advantage and according to WAR yes. But realistically it just doesn't make sense.
Lee Smith 1983 the year you used for him- ERA- 1.65 SAVES- 29 LOSSES- 10
Eric Gagne - 2003 ERA- 1.2. SAVES 55 BLOWN SAVES 0. Cy Young Award Winner
The guy was perfect, literally the undisputed best season ever for a closer and your WAR argument suggests that Smith was better. He lost 10 games that year with just 29 saves.
I can go through player by player and find discrepancies on the WAR like this, but just wanted to highlight the first that caught my eye. It is not possible to have a closer advantage on a guy who went 55/55 with a 1.2 ERA.
Touche for all these stats you are gathering, but WAR is just not a perfect metric by any means and also takes a team's record into account. Nolan Ryan by any publication is one of the best pitchers ever, and is the MLB strikeout leader. His 7.8 WAR is simply not indicative of his real value to his team, because the team around him stunk. If your team doesn't win a lot of games, your WAR won't be good. Throw him on the same teams Seaver was on, and it's likely Ryan's WAR is higher.
Ryan had one season with a 1.69 ERA- absurd for a starting pitcher, and in that season his WAR was just 4.7 because the Rangers were bad.
Seaver on the flip side had an ERA of 1.76 in his best season, while his WAR was above 10. Why would you ever value a higher ERA?
Let's not understate Nolan Ryan's greatness. He had 5,714 strikeouts in his career. Your Seaver was actually 6th best ever in that regard and had just 3,640.
Lower ERA and more strikeouts, I know which one I'm taking...
Again I appreciate the WAR argument, but if someone decides to vote for your team because of that argument, then they are literally saying Shoeless Joe Jackson is as good of a player as Ken Griffey Jr in his prime. And that Jimmie Foxx is a better baseball player than Griffey in his prime.
For that matter I would have just drafted Tim Keefe and his WAR number of 20. Or “Old Hoss Radbourn” and his WAR number of 19, since those two were twice the player Mike Trout is .
If the argument is who is best for their time then yes you could at least make an argument. But that’s not The argument. You still have to put these players on the same field and play a World Series.
Imagine splitting these guys up and having 2 captains. Do you really think a captain is going to select some guy named Kid Nichols over Nolan Ryan. Or that he will select Jimmie Foxx over Ken Griffey Jr because he likes the WAR numbers on a piece of paper.
It's just not gonna happen.
For that matter I would have just drafted Tim Keefe and his WAR number of 20. Or “Old Hoss Radbourn” and his WAR number of 19, since those two were twice the player Mike Trout is .
If the argument is who is best for their time then yes you could at least make an argument. But that’s not The argument. You still have to put these players on the same field and play a World Series.
Imagine splitting these guys up and having 2 captains. Do you really think a captain is going to select some guy named Kid Nichols over Nolan Ryan. Or that he will select Jimmie Foxx over Ken Griffey Jr because he likes the WAR numbers on a piece of paper.
It's just not gonna happen.
Last edited:
Kid Nichols - WAR number 12.9 - greater than Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, and Pedro Martinez best season
This is the guy set to face Trout Griffey Big Mac, Slammin Sammy, and Edgar Martinez twice. My guys are ready for their home run derby.
your move @drcats2013 haha
Last edited:
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/20032925/1149967174.jpg.jpg)
Honestly, chalk 2 games vs Nichols up as auto wins for my team.
Do you all really think my team can’t win 2 more games before his wins 4? He would have to go 4-1 in the other games. Against all pitchers with sub 1.7 ERA. Against some of the best sluggers of all time. With 3 guys from 90 years ago who probably couldn’t bench press 150, and rarely saw a fastball in the 90s, let alone the 108 mph that Nolan Ryan could hit.
Just not seeing it.
Last edited:
Basing opinion about athletic performance on what someone looks like in a picture is crazy. First of all there bodies would look completely different with modern training techniques. Second, you could post some pics of someone like Greg Maddox, who was completely dominant in the modern era, and he wouldn’t look like an athlete at all. But I’d sure as hell take him over the pitchers quest is running out there.
The pitchers I’m running out there ? 5 guys with a sub 1.7 ERA in their best season? Ok haha.
Gooden, Guidry, and Arrieta alone combined for a record of 71-13 in their best season, all against modern hitters.
Not sure how you can say that you are taking Kid Nichols over those guys when you never saw him play. I’m not sure you can say with 100 % certainty that Kid Nichols would be a good division 1 college baseball player today. Just go back and watch any other sport where there’s more footage, like football and basketball and it’s clear that athletes weren’t close to as talented back then. It wasn’t just weight training, they were smaller, slower, and less skilled.
Let’s remember that black players were not even allowed to play in the MLB when Kid Nichols, Shoeless Joe, Jimmie Fox, and Mel Ott were playing. Those guys were not even competing against the best baseball players in the world, just the best white baseball players.
Fair point on looks, but I think it’s fair for the voters to see with their own eyes the players you are talking up as world beaters, and not just these gaudy, skewed numbers and metrics you are throwing out there. Kid Nichols is no Greg Maddux.
Gooden, Guidry, and Arrieta alone combined for a record of 71-13 in their best season, all against modern hitters.
Not sure how you can say that you are taking Kid Nichols over those guys when you never saw him play. I’m not sure you can say with 100 % certainty that Kid Nichols would be a good division 1 college baseball player today. Just go back and watch any other sport where there’s more footage, like football and basketball and it’s clear that athletes weren’t close to as talented back then. It wasn’t just weight training, they were smaller, slower, and less skilled.
Let’s remember that black players were not even allowed to play in the MLB when Kid Nichols, Shoeless Joe, Jimmie Fox, and Mel Ott were playing. Those guys were not even competing against the best baseball players in the world, just the best white baseball players.
Fair point on looks, but I think it’s fair for the voters to see with their own eyes the players you are talking up as world beaters, and not just these gaudy, skewed numbers and metrics you are throwing out there. Kid Nichols is no Greg Maddux.
Last edited:
Let's agree that we can't judge a player that we haven't seen play.
If I can't take Nichols over your guys because I haven't seen him play then you can't take your guys over Nichols because you too haven't seen him play. Your statement above defeats the entire argument that you have been making in all of your posts.
If, in fact, as you said, we can't judge a player we haven't seen play. I agree with your belief wholeheartedly. It could even be argued that it would be fundamentally unfair to the entire process of making player comparisons to make assumptions about players we have never seen play. Give that we both agree, we have no choice but to let their stats stand in as the judge for how good they were. The stats say that he was a dominant pitcher, better than anyone on your staff.
We must use stats because if we don't we are forced to make arguments based on pictures and form opinions about players who we have never seen play (can't do that, you said so yourself). If we are going to use stats then, logically, we must use WAR. We could cherry pick individual stats, I suppose. But why waste our time going around in circles when we could use the stat that is almost universally accepted as the best measure of a players value.
You've made clear your desire to use peak performance the measure for this contest. I would refer back to my previous single season WAR post. Without making impossible judgements about players that we haven't seen play, I have the best lineup, the best bench, the best rotation, and the best closer.
For the record, I do like your team and I have enjoyed this entire competition. I wish I could have been involved in some of the previous drafts.
Last edited:
All fair. I’ve appreciated the debate.
It’s my stance that I have the best offense, defense, base running, and pitching. You’ve made good argument on your end with the numbers, while I’ve made good argument on my end on the many other factors that I think should be considered.
I like your team as well and understand why it’s a close vote. If I didn’t debate and attack the weaknesses I see on your team and in your arguments, then what would be the point of this contest lol.
I think we can both agree that yes we don’t know a ton about some of your players. I’m sure they were great for their time. Whether they were better players than mine, who knows. I personally don’t believe so, but I cannot prove that either as I never saw them.
That is one reason I do post photos of them, because as you have been able to win voters over with some nice metric data, I have to win voters over with their eyes and by disproving the validity of your data.
The one thing I can guarantee is that my team would hit a lot more home runs than yours in a given series. If you can disprove that one I’ll vote for you haha
It’s my stance that I have the best offense, defense, base running, and pitching. You’ve made good argument on your end with the numbers, while I’ve made good argument on my end on the many other factors that I think should be considered.
I like your team as well and understand why it’s a close vote. If I didn’t debate and attack the weaknesses I see on your team and in your arguments, then what would be the point of this contest lol.
I think we can both agree that yes we don’t know a ton about some of your players. I’m sure they were great for their time. Whether they were better players than mine, who knows. I personally don’t believe so, but I cannot prove that either as I never saw them.
That is one reason I do post photos of them, because as you have been able to win voters over with some nice metric data, I have to win voters over with their eyes and by disproving the validity of your data.
The one thing I can guarantee is that my team would hit a lot more home runs than yours in a given series. If you can disprove that one I’ll vote for you haha
Ted Williams picture does not look too intimidating but without a doubt he could compete in todays game- these HOF are Hall of Famers for a reason- and at least did not get there from the use of performing enhancing drugs, absurd technology boost etc.
Idk. I see the logic behind both teams but do not understand the my guy is better just because he played in the 90's vs a guy in the 20's or whatever.
Idk. I see the logic behind both teams but do not understand the my guy is better just because he played in the 90's vs a guy in the 20's or whatever.
Sounds like you’re living the dream man. Rather be traveling the west than an intense sports argument on here haha. Enjoy !
I get that, but I don’t think you can just say my guy is better just because this metric said so either.
Both however are valid points and I think we’ve both done as much as we can to argue the reasons why our teams are better.
You do realize we aren't making direct comparisons of players. This is about statistics. Otherwise old time players would be viewed as inferior. It would make Babe Ruth meaningless, Honus Wagner too. Who would care about Walter Johnson or Lou Gehrig when comparing them to todays players. You simply can't match them directly, its all about the stats.
Since you're out of the competition now, you have every right to vote.
[QUOTE="quest4#9, post: 9025530, member: 11754"
The one thing I can guarantee is that my team would hit a lot more home runs than yours in a given series. If you can disprove that one I’ll vote for you haha[/QUOTE]
You seem like a legitimately good guy who wouldn't go back on his word so I accept your challenge. Prepare to change your vote.
Career HR totals for our listed starting lineups:
csrupp-3021
quest4#9-2819
Single season high HR totals for listed starting lineups:
csrupp-320
quest4#9-333
I'd like to note that my original lineup wasn't structured for maximum HRs because I don't think that is good measure for which lineup is better. If HRs are to be used as the measure both teams have players on the bench that would be in the starting lineups. The following shows HR stats when lineups are adjusted for maximum HRs.
Single season high HR totals when lineups are adjusted:
csrupp-358
quest4#9-342
@quest4#9 Your guarantee that you asked me do disprove is that your team "would hit a lot more home runs than yours in a given series". I have disproven that in this post. I've enjoyed the process and I appreciate your vote.
The one thing I can guarantee is that my team would hit a lot more home runs than yours in a given series. If you can disprove that one I’ll vote for you haha[/QUOTE]
You seem like a legitimately good guy who wouldn't go back on his word so I accept your challenge. Prepare to change your vote.
Career HR totals for our listed starting lineups:
csrupp-3021
quest4#9-2819
Single season high HR totals for listed starting lineups:
csrupp-320
quest4#9-333
I'd like to note that my original lineup wasn't structured for maximum HRs because I don't think that is good measure for which lineup is better. If HRs are to be used as the measure both teams have players on the bench that would be in the starting lineups. The following shows HR stats when lineups are adjusted for maximum HRs.
Single season high HR totals when lineups are adjusted:
csrupp-358
quest4#9-342
@quest4#9 Your guarantee that you asked me do disprove is that your team "would hit a lot more home runs than yours in a given series". I have disproven that in this post. I've enjoyed the process and I appreciate your vote.
Last edited:
This is interesting. https://imaginesports.com/news/play-historical-fantasy-baseball
Of particular note is how players from different eras are valued. (Hint: it is stats based)
Of particular note is how players from different eras are valued. (Hint: it is stats based)
