He is 56th in career WAR for position players.
Walker is 30th in OPS for all players with 2500+ PAs from 1990-2005 in away games (.866). 19 guys had at least .900. Even at 3500+ PAs, he is just 19th. Is that good enough for the Hall?
This link has the data
https://baseball-reference.com/tiny/kqTy0
Walker was 25th in away OPS during 1990-94 (Expos years) for guys with 1000+ PAs with .823. 7 guys had at least .900
One person on Twitter wondered about Hank Greenberg. He was 4th in away OPS using 2500+ PAs over the years 1933-1947.
Thursday, December 19, 2019
Monday, November 25, 2019
Some Amazing Stats On Joe DiMaggio On His Birthday; Factoring In How Much Yankee Stadium Might Have Hurt Him Raises His Rank In WAR
These are all posts from a few years ago:
Which Players Had The Best HR-To-Strikeout Ratios? Taking league average and park effects into account, DiMaggio had one of the best HR to strikeout rates ever.
Joe DiMaggio Led MLB In Road Slugging Percentage, 1936-51.
Should Joe DiMaggio's Offensive Value Be Estimated Upwards Because Of Yankee Stadium? If he had normal home/away splits, his numbers would be much more impressive. He would have a career OBP of .413 and a career SLG of .621.
Which Players Had The Best HR-To-Strikeout Ratios? Taking league average and park effects into account, DiMaggio had one of the best HR to strikeout rates ever.
Joe DiMaggio Led MLB In Road Slugging Percentage, 1936-51.
Should Joe DiMaggio's Offensive Value Be Estimated Upwards Because Of Yankee Stadium? If he had normal home/away splits, his numbers would be much more impressive. He would have a career OBP of .413 and a career SLG of .621.
Thursday, November 7, 2019
Biggest world series upsets by OPS differential (with this year being 4th)
I used data from Retrosheet and Baseball Reference (the one year missing is 1903 since neither site has OPS allowed for the pennant winners). This is based on regular season OPS differential.
So this year was the 4th biggest upset.
Of course, maybe late season OPS differential could be a factor. But as I recall, there is research that says if a team is hot late in the season it does not necessarily translate into success in the post-season.
But late in the season, the Astros' advantage over the Nats only grew. In the 2nd half Houston had a .222 OPS differential while Washington had .098. In Sept/Oct, those numbers were .276 and .072.
So this year was the 4th biggest upset.
Of course, maybe late season OPS differential could be a factor. But as I recall, there is research that says if a team is hot late in the season it does not necessarily translate into success in the post-season.
But late in the season, the Astros' advantage over the Nats only grew. In the 2nd half Houston had a .222 OPS differential while Washington had .098. In Sept/Oct, those numbers were .276 and .072.
| Year | Winner | OPS DIFF | Loser | OPS DIFF | Diff |
| 1906 | CHW | 0.003 | CHC | 0.131 | -0.128 |
| 1969 | NYM | 0.017 | BAL | 0.136 | -0.119 |
| 1921 | NYG | 0.050 | NYY | 0.155 | -0.105 |
| 2019 | WSN | 0.070 | HOU | 0.167 | -0.097 |
| 2006 | STL | -0.010 | DET | 0.052 | -0.062 |
| 1974 | OAK | 0.048 | LAD | 0.109 | -0.061 |
| 1995 | ATL | 0.062 | CLE | 0.121 | -0.059 |
| 2003 | FLA | 0.032 | NYY | 0.089 | -0.057 |
| 1914 | BSN | 0.036 | PHA | 0.09 | -0.054 |
| 2011 | STL | 0.049 | TEX | 0.102 | -0.053 |
| 1931 | STL | 0.056 | PHA | 0.109 | -0.053 |
Saturday, September 28, 2019
Astros might be best team since 1927 Yankees
It is .167 thru Friday, Sept. 27. Their team OPS is .847
and they have allowed .680. If they finish with that, it will be the 2nd
highest since 1908, trailing only the 1927 Yankees. The Astros will
easily have the highest differential of any team since 1939.
In
the first half (90 games), their differential was .123. In the 2nd half
(70 games) it has been .222. The 1927 Yankees had .201 for the whole
season.
Here is a link to the rankings I compiled using the Baseball Reference Play Index.
https://cybermetric.blogspot.com/2019/05/historical-team-ops-differentials.html
Update Sept: 30: The Astros finish with .167. Just to make sure they are still above the 1913 A's, I did OBP and SLG to several decimal places (to check rounding issues). The results are in the table below, although it looks like Baseball Reference does not count sacrifice hits in PAs in 1913 but does include SFs in 2019 (back in 1913 there was not distinction). The Dodgers finished with .149, which will make them the 7th best team since 1908 (but I did not look for rounding issues to compare them to the 1922 Browns to see if they might be better).
Update Sept: 30: The Astros finish with .167. Just to make sure they are still above the 1913 A's, I did OBP and SLG to several decimal places (to check rounding issues). The results are in the table below, although it looks like Baseball Reference does not count sacrifice hits in PAs in 1913 but does include SFs in 2019 (back in 1913 there was not distinction). The Dodgers finished with .149, which will make them the 7th best team since 1908 (but I did not look for rounding issues to compare them to the 1922 Browns to see if they might be better).
|
1913 A's
|
OBP
|
SLG
|
OPS
|
|
Hitting
|
0.35646
|
0.375767
|
0.732227
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OBP
|
SLG
|
OPS
|
|
Pitching
|
0.306238
|
0.260057
|
0.566295
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diff.
|
|
|
0.165932
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019 Astros
|
OBP
|
SLG
|
OPS
|
|
Hitting
|
0.352453
|
0.495457
|
0.84791
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pitching
|
OBP
|
SLG
|
OPS
|
|
|
0.283278
|
0.397363
|
0.680641
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diff.
|
|
|
0.167269
|
Thursday, September 5, 2019
Why 538 is wrong about Verlander and the Hall of Fame
I strongly disagree with this 538 article saying "Everyone Thinks
Justin Verlander Belongs In The Hall Of Fame. So Why Don’t The Stats
Agree?"
It says he is a bit below the average for starting pitchers in the Hall in JAWS rating
Here is the comment I left there
Then if you look, Verlander is actually 36th all-time in JAWS with no revision. That seems like a pretty high rank, maybe good enough for the Hall.
At Baseball Reference he is 30th in career WAR for pitchers while having had 3 first place finishes, a 2nd and a 3rd. And this year will be 1st or 2nd.
He is a definite Hall of Famer
Here are 3 guys who Verlander is ahead of in JAWS and their vote % in their first year of eligibility. They all made it in easily
Palmer 92.6%
Hubbell 87%
Marichal 83.7%
Update: My friend Jerry Miller pointed out that Marichal got in his 3rd year. He got 58% in his first year. Hubbell got voted in in 1947 with his last year in baseball being 1943. Here is what it shows at his Baseball Reference page. It seems like the voting schemes were going through some changes then.
| 1945 BBWAA ( 9.7%) |
| 1946 Final Ballot (28.5%) |
| 1946 Nominating Vote (50.0%) |
| 1947 BBWAA (87.0%) |
Tuesday, August 13, 2019
How Did The Cubs Do Statistically In 1969 When The Mets Passed Them To Clinch The NL East Title?
At the close of play on Aug. 13 1969, the Mets were 10 games behind the Cubs in the NL East. The Mets clinched the division on Sept 24, being 6 game ahead of the Cubs with both teams having played 157 games. The Mets went 34-10 while the Cubs went 16-24 in that stretch.
In my last post I showed how the Mets did in their 34-10 stretch. Their hitters were no better or worse than they had been previously. But the pitching (and maybe defense) were much better.
But the Cubs did much worse in both hitting and pitching in their 16-24 stretch. Here is how the Cubs did in their first 118 games and then the next 40.
Runs per game fell from 4.71 to 4.1. Even though their OBP fell 46 points, their GDPs per game rose from .678 per game to .825 per game.
Now for the pitching. The picture is pretty ugly.
They gave up, including ROEs, about 1.8 more base runners per game, exclusive of HRs, which went up .214 per game. Strikeouts were down about .9 per game. Their ERA went up a little more than a run while it went down 1.32 for the Mets.
Up through Aug. 13, the Cubs were 74-43. They had outscored their opponents 556-407. In the 40 game stretch, they were outscored 188-164.
In my last post I showed how the Mets did in their 34-10 stretch. Their hitters were no better or worse than they had been previously. But the pitching (and maybe defense) were much better.
But the Cubs did much worse in both hitting and pitching in their 16-24 stretch. Here is how the Cubs did in their first 118 games and then the next 40.
Stat
|
First 118
|
16-24
|
Runs
|
556
|
164
|
OPS
|
0.733
|
0.636
|
AVG
|
0.264
|
0.225
|
OBP
|
0.336
|
0.290
|
SLG
|
0.398
|
0.346
|
GDP
|
80
|
33
|
Runs per game fell from 4.71 to 4.1. Even though their OBP fell 46 points, their GDPs per game rose from .678 per game to .825 per game.
Now for the pitching. The picture is pretty ugly.
Stat
|
First 118
|
16-24
|
% Change
|
ERA
|
3.10
|
4.19
|
35.16%
|
Hits
|
8.110
|
9.275
|
14.36%
|
HRs
|
0.686
|
0.900
|
31.11%
|
BBs
|
2.763
|
3.475
|
25.78%
|
Non-HRs
|
7.424
|
8.375
|
12.81%
|
GDP
|
0.712
|
0.775
|
8.87%
|
HBP
|
0.144
|
0.300
|
108.24%
|
ROE
|
0.508
|
0.625
|
22.92%
|
SO
|
6.483
|
5.575
|
-14.01%
|
They gave up, including ROEs, about 1.8 more base runners per game, exclusive of HRs, which went up .214 per game. Strikeouts were down about .9 per game. Their ERA went up a little more than a run while it went down 1.32 for the Mets.
Up through Aug. 13, the Cubs were 74-43. They had outscored their opponents 556-407. In the 40 game stretch, they were outscored 188-164.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)