Thank You, Derek Jeter (please no haters!!!)

[thesweetscience]

None of us saw who play? :codger: :sigh:

None of us saw who play? :codger: :sigh:

 

Good point. Did you see Wagner as a Colonel or just a Pirate?

I thought we were talking about Yount or Ozzy. Anyone after about 1969, I certainly saw play and plenty.... :)

I was talking about Wagner.

 

Pitching was different then and the equipment was different too. It's hard to compare how these guys would stack up in the modern era. Maybe they would be God like or maybe they would just be average.

This is a fascinating topic. I think the case could be made that the best players in the 1910s would have trouble cracking a major league lineup today. But this is unprovable of course.

 

Walter Johnson had a 90 MPH fastball (though who knows what kind of motion he had on it). That's average today.

 

Maybe Walter Johnson's most impressive achievement was running for a Maryland Congressional seat as a Republican and only losing by 6%.

I agree that its a fascinating topic. Another consideration is the consistency of the ball and the size of the parks. Modern balls are wound like golf balls and the ball parks are small enough that a routine fly can go out of most of them.

 

But they say the toughest thing to do in modern sports is to hit major league pitching and who knows if those old time players would have ever learned to hit today's pitching. The difference in pitching is the biggest question mark for me.

[LedRush]

I am curious to hear who people think was a better overall shortstop than Jeter? Especially in the modern era. If you look at his numbers he is easily top 3 or 4 of all time if not number one. First ballot hall of fame inductee.

 

Who was better and why?

Peak value or career value? And for players who played a significant majority of games at SS or based only on what they did at SS?

 

If it's career value, he's up there with anyone but Wagner (I know, not modern era). Either him, Ozzy Smith, or Cal...

 

If it's peak value, there are a number of players that could hang with him (more if you don't include guys on roids—well, one particular guy) if not exceed his performance.

 

Obviously, he's a first ballot guy who would only not be unanimous because there's always some a-hole writer(s) who won't vote for someone on the first ballot. Should be 98%+ though.

 

Wagner is the only one for me. You can make a case for Cal, but having watched both their careers I have a hard time putting Cal near Jeter. If a-rod ever plays again, he'll have more at batsbasnan3rd basemen than a SS.

[ReRushed]

None of us saw who play? :codger: :sigh:

None of us saw who play? :codger: :sigh:

 

Good point. Did you see Wagner as a Colonel or just a Pirate?

I thought we were talking about Yount or Ozzy. Anyone after about 1969, I certainly saw play and plenty.... :)

I was talking about Wagner.

 

Pitching was different then and the equipment was different too. It's hard to compare how these guys would stack up in the modern era. Maybe they would be God like or maybe they would just be average.

This is a fascinating topic. I think the case could be made that the best players in the 1910s would have trouble cracking a major league lineup today. But this is unprovable of course.

 

Walter Johnson had a 90 MPH fastball (though who knows what kind of motion he had on it). That's average today.

 

Maybe Walter Johnson's most impressive achievement was running for a Maryland Congressional seat as a Republican and only losing by 6%.

I agree that its a fascinating topic. Another consideration is the consistency of the ball and the size of the parks. Modern balls are wound like golf balls and the ball parks are small enough that a routine fly can go out of most of them.

 

But they say the toughest thing to do in modern sports is to hit major league pitching and who knows if those old time players would have ever learned to hit today's pitching. The difference in pitching is the biggest question mark for me.

The dead ball era had to be harder. Spit balls. The SAME ball the entire game. And they still threw the ball pretty hard. And batters didn't wear helmets.

[LedRush]

None of us saw who play? :codger: :sigh:

None of us saw who play? :codger: :sigh:

 

Good point. Did you see Wagner as a Colonel or just a Pirate?

I thought we were talking about Yount or Ozzy. Anyone after about 1969, I certainly saw play and plenty.... :)

I was talking about Wagner.

 

Pitching was different then and the equipment was different too. It's hard to compare how these guys would stack up in the modern era. Maybe they would be God like or maybe they would just be average.

This is a fascinating topic. I think the case could be made that the best players in the 1910s would have trouble cracking a major league lineup today. But this is unprovable of course.

 

Walter Johnson had a 90 MPH fastball (though who knows what kind of motion he had on it). That's average today.

 

Maybe Walter Johnson's most impressive achievement was running for a Maryland Congressional seat as a Republican and only losing by 6%.

I agree that its a fascinating topic. Another consideration is the consistency of the ball and the size of the parks. Modern balls are wound like golf balls and the ball parks are small enough that a routine fly can go out of most of them.

 

But they say the toughest thing to do in modern sports is to hit major league pitching and who knows if those old time players would have ever learned to hit today's pitching. The difference in pitching is the biggest question mark for me.

The dead ball era had to be harder. Spit balls. The SAME ball the entire game. And they still threw the ball pretty hard. And batters didn't wear helmets.

 

No blacks. No minorities. No training regimens. No relievers.

[ReRushed]

None of us saw who play? :codger: :sigh:

None of us saw who play? :codger: :sigh:

 

Good point. Did you see Wagner as a Colonel or just a Pirate?

I thought we were talking about Yount or Ozzy. Anyone after about 1969, I certainly saw play and plenty.... :)

I was talking about Wagner.

 

Pitching was different then and the equipment was different too. It's hard to compare how these guys would stack up in the modern era. Maybe they would be God like or maybe they would just be average.

This is a fascinating topic. I think the case could be made that the best players in the 1910s would have trouble cracking a major league lineup today. But this is unprovable of course.

 

Walter Johnson had a 90 MPH fastball (though who knows what kind of motion he had on it). That's average today.

 

Maybe Walter Johnson's most impressive achievement was running for a Maryland Congressional seat as a Republican and only losing by 6%.

I agree that its a fascinating topic. Another consideration is the consistency of the ball and the size of the parks. Modern balls are wound like golf balls and the ball parks are small enough that a routine fly can go out of most of them.

 

But they say the toughest thing to do in modern sports is to hit major league pitching and who knows if those old time players would have ever learned to hit today's pitching. The difference in pitching is the biggest question mark for me.

The dead ball era had to be harder. Spit balls. The SAME ball the entire game. And they still threw the ball pretty hard. And batters didn't wear helmets.

 

No blacks. No minorities. No training regimens. No relievers.

Okay. I don't know what that has to do with the difficulty of playing the game. I'm sure Rube Foster had the same game situations as Walter Johnson. Social injustices aside, they played the game the same way.. I think.

 

And does anyone today approach pitching 300 innings?

 

Also, imagine Babe Ruth's stats if he had a better diet!

[1-0-0-1-0-0-1]

I watched his entire career....

 

Me too. Hard to believe this will be Jeter's 20th season in the bigs, all with the same team.

[LedRush]

None of us saw who play? :codger: :sigh:

None of us saw who play? :codger: :sigh:

 

Good point. Did you see Wagner as a Colonel or just a Pirate?

I thought we were talking about Yount or Ozzy. Anyone after about 1969, I certainly saw play and plenty.... :)

I was talking about Wagner.

 

Pitching was different then and the equipment was different too. It's hard to compare how these guys would stack up in the modern era. Maybe they would be God like or maybe they would just be average.

This is a fascinating topic. I think the case could be made that the best players in the 1910s would have trouble cracking a major league lineup today. But this is unprovable of course.

 

Walter Johnson had a 90 MPH fastball (though who knows what kind of motion he had on it). That's average today.

 

Maybe Walter Johnson's most impressive achievement was running for a Maryland Congressional seat as a Republican and only losing by 6%.

I agree that its a fascinating topic. Another consideration is the consistency of the ball and the size of the parks. Modern balls are wound like golf balls and the ball parks are small enough that a routine fly can go out of most of them.

 

But they say the toughest thing to do in modern sports is to hit major league pitching and who knows if those old time players would have ever learned to hit today's pitching. The difference in pitching is the biggest question mark for me.

The dead ball era had to be harder. Spit balls. The SAME ball the entire game. And they still threw the ball pretty hard. And batters didn't wear helmets.

 

No blacks. No minorities. No training regimens. No relievers.

Okay. I don't know what that has to do with the difficulty of playing the game. I'm sure Rube Foster had the same game situations as Walter Johnson. Social injustices aside, they played the game the same way.. I think.

 

And does anyone today approach pitching 300 innings?

 

Also, imagine Babe Ruth's stats if he had a better diet!

 

When your competition is much easier than it should be, then it is easier to play the game. Have you never really heard that argument before? I can't remember the last time I talked about comparing eras and not heard the argument.

[calirush]

My take; I've enjoyed watching Jeter play his whole career while not being a Yankee fan. Not many players make it easy for me to do but he was one of them. If you want stats that stand out about Jeter just compare his regular season with World Series, they are both good. I could go on and on about why he is great to me.

 

I dug back a bit and found this column made as Jeter was pushing for 3000. I found this because I asked myself. How many players have reached 3000 in less than twenty years? How many were shortstops?

 

http://espn.go.com/m...march-3000-hits

Very, very, very few players -- and fewer shortstops -- have had the kind of career this man has had, where every season looked just about exactly like every other season. Until the last two, anyway. And that's what it takes to get a man into the 3,000-Hit Club.

 

But for some reason, as Jeter completes the journey to one of the most important milestones of modern times, we haven't focused enough on that aspect of Jeter's march to 3,000 hits. So let's change the subject, OK?

STRIKE ONE -- JUST 17 DEPT.

 

He arrived in the big leagues on May 29, 1995. He arrived to stay in September 1995. So this is only Jeter's 17th season in the major leagues. And you know how many players since 1900 have reached 3,000 hits in 17 seasons or fewer?

Just five -- and now him.

See if you've heard of these other five men:

Pete Rose, Stan Musial, Hank Aaron, Ty Cobb and Paul Waner.

And if you'd like to see how many hits some other great players had in their first 17 big league seasons, check out this list at baseball-reference.com. It was a list that really put this feat in perspective for me.

STRIKE TWO -- THE 190-HIT CLUB

 

Take a look at Jeter's career numbers. Now check out the hit column. Maybe Jeter didn't quite crank out 190 hits or more in every season of his career. But it was close.

He's done it 10 times already. And the list of players who have had 10 seasons of at least 190 hits since 1900 is another very cool group. Here it is, according to Lee Sinins' Complete Baseball Encyclopedia:

1. Pete Rose, 13

2. Ty Cobb, 12

T3. Stan Musial, 10

T3. Derek Jeter, 10

T3. Ichiro Suzuki, 10

 

If you're hanging around with those dudes, you could hit, friends. It's that simple.

But this guy wasn't just slapping singles for all those years. If you want to limit the list to seasons of 190 hits and a .400 slugging percentage, only Rose, Cobb, Musial and Jeter had at least 10 years like that.

And how many other players had at least 10 seasons with 190 hits, plus double figures in both home runs and stolen bases?

Not ONE.

Just Derek Jeter.

You could look it up.

STRIKE THREE -- IN SHORT ORDER DEPT.

 

Finally, there's one other thing we ought to mention: This man did all this as a shortstop.

My friend Brian Kenny got me to thinking this week how rare it is to inject that little subplot into the 3,000-hit conversation. So let's inject it right now.

How many members of the 3,000-Hit Club spent most of their careers as a shortstop? Precisely two -- Honus Wagner and Calvin E. Ripken Jr.

And while the list of shortstops with sustained stretches of offensive excellence is longer than that list, it isn't a whole lot longer.

There's no easy way to measure that sort of thing. But the statistic that comes closest is adjusted OPS-plus, because it adjusts the numbers for eras, ballparks, etc.

So through the miracle of the baseball-reference.com Play Index, I ran this list of most seasons with an adjusted OPS-plus of 110 or above by shortstops in modern history.

No shortstop in history had more seasons like that than Wagner (13). But after him, the leader board looks like this:

Jeter 11

Arky Vaughan 11

Luke Appling 11

Barry Larkin 10

Edited February 19, 2014 by calirush

[LedRush]

My take; I've enjoyed watching Jeter play his whole career while not being a Yankee fan. Not many players make it easy for me to do but he was one of them. If you want stats that stand out about Jeter just compare his regular season with World Series, they are both good. I could go on and on about why he is great to me.

 

I dug back a bit and found this column made as Jeter was pushing for 3000. I found this because I asked myself. How many players have reached 3000 in less than twenty years? How many were shortstops?

 

http://espn.go.com/m...march-3000-hits

Very, very, very few players -- and fewer shortstops -- have had the kind of career this man has had, where every season looked just about exactly like every other season. Until the last two, anyway. And that's what it takes to get a man into the 3,000-Hit Club.

 

But for some reason, as Jeter completes the journey to one of the most important milestones of modern times, we haven't focused enough on that aspect of Jeter's march to 3,000 hits. So let's change the subject, OK?

STRIKE ONE -- JUST 17 DEPT.

 

He arrived in the big leagues on May 29, 1995. He arrived to stay in September 1995. So this is only Jeter's 17th season in the major leagues. And you know how many players since 1900 have reached 3,000 hits in 17 seasons or fewer?

Just five -- and now him.

See if you've heard of these other five men:

Pete Rose, Stan Musial, Hank Aaron, Ty Cobb and Paul Waner.

And if you'd like to see how many hits some other great players had in their first 17 big league seasons, check out this list at baseball-reference.com. It was a list that really put this feat in perspective for me.

STRIKE TWO -- THE 190-HIT CLUB

 

Take a look at Jeter's career numbers. Now check out the hit column. Maybe Jeter didn't quite crank out 190 hits or more in every season of his career. But it was close.

He's done it 10 times already. And the list of players who have had 10 seasons of at least 190 hits since 1900 is another very cool group. Here it is, according to Lee Sinins' Complete Baseball Encyclopedia:

1. Pete Rose, 13

2. Ty Cobb, 12

T3. Stan Musial, 10

T3. Derek Jeter, 10

T3. Ichiro Suzuki, 10

 

If you're hanging around with those dudes, you could hit, friends. It's that simple.

But this guy wasn't just slapping singles for all those years. If you want to limit the list to seasons of 190 hits and a .400 slugging percentage, only Rose, Cobb, Musial and Jeter had at least 10 years like that.

And how many other players had at least 10 seasons with 190 hits, plus double figures in both home runs and stolen bases?

Not ONE.

Just Derek Jeter.

You could look it up.

STRIKE THREE -- IN SHORT ORDER DEPT.

 

Finally, there's one other thing we ought to mention: This man did all this as a shortstop.

My friend Brian Kenny got me to thinking this week how rare it is to inject that little subplot into the 3,000-hit conversation. So let's inject it right now.

How many members of the 3,000-Hit Club spent most of their careers as a shortstop? Precisely two -- Honus Wagner and Calvin E. Ripken Jr.

And while the list of shortstops with sustained stretches of offensive excellence is longer than that list, it isn't a whole lot longer.

There's no easy way to measure that sort of thing. But the statistic that comes closest is adjusted OPS-plus, because it adjusts the numbers for eras, ballparks, etc.

So through the miracle of the baseball-reference.com Play Index, I ran this list of most seasons with an adjusted OPS-plus of 110 or above by shortstops in modern history.

No shortstop in history had more seasons like that than Wagner (13). But after him, the leader board looks like this:

Jeter 11

Arky Vaughan 11

Luke Appling 11

Barry Larkin 10

 

Strikes Two/Three needs an update. Jeter got 216 hits and OPS+114 in 2012.

[laughedatbytime]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

[calirush]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

 

The column highlighted the points I mentioned which is why I referenced it here. Stats are fun but I never needed them to know that Jeter is one of the elite players of all time.

Edited February 20, 2014 by calirush

[laughedatbytime]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

 

The column highlightied the points I mentioned which is why I referenced it here. Stats are fun but I never needed them to know that Jeter is one of the elite players of all time.

If he was a .260 hitter with 2300 hits but with the same post season record, he'd be a Hall of Famer.

[Disk98]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but Jeter has NOT fallen off. He was hurt last year, is all. In his last full season, he hit above his lifetime average led the league in hits! I have complete and utter faith he'll hit at least .290. Hardly falling off, if you ask me.

[LedRush]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

 

Are the hit totals statistics confined to shortstops?

[LedRush]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but Jeter has NOT fallen off. He was hurt last year, is all. In his last full season, he hit above his lifetime average led the league in hits! I have complete and utter faith he'll hit at least .290. Hardly falling off, if you ask me.

 

He is making the argument that despite incredibly good fielding percentage and gold gloves, Jeter's range makes him the shittiest shortstop ever to play the game (defensively).

[laughedatbytime]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but Jeter has NOT fallen off. He was hurt last year, is all. In his last full season, he hit above his lifetime average led the league in hits! I have complete and utter faith he'll hit at least .290. Hardly falling off, if you ask me.

 

He is making the argument that despite incredibly good fielding percentage and gold gloves, Jeter's range makes him the shittiest shortstop ever to play the game (defensively).

Yep. That's exactly what I'm arguing.

 

What a fabulous, incisive post! :clap: :clap: :clap:

Edited February 20, 2014 by laughedatbytime

[calirush]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but Jeter has NOT fallen off. He was hurt last year, is all. In his last full season, he hit above his lifetime average led the league in hits! I have complete and utter faith he'll hit at least .290. Hardly falling off, if you ask me.

 

He is making the argument that despite incredibly good fielding percentage and gold gloves, Jeter's range makes him the shittiest shortstop ever to play the game (defensively).

Yep. That's exactly what I'm arguing.

 

What a fabulous, incisive post! :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

 

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/44294/a-few-notes-on-derek-jeters-defense

OK, back to Jeter. Saying he cost his team more runs on defense than any other player isn't the same thing as saying he's the worst defensive player of all time. Obviously he's a better defender than Adam Dunn or Manny Ramirez or Dave Kingman or Greg Luzinski. He was good enough to remain at shortstop for nearly two decades. Baseball-Reference rates Jeter's worst years as -27 in 2005, -24 in in 2007 and -23 in 2000. He rates as plus defender twice: +2 in 1998 and +4 in 2009. As Ben Lindbergh wrote last year on Grantland, after Brian Cashman told Jeter after the 2007 season that he needed to work on his positioning and lateral quickness, he did makes some changed and improve on defense for a couple years. Then he got old.

 

Maybe Jeter didn't deserve those five Gold Gloves. But the Yankees still won five rings with him at shortstop. In the end, I'd say everything worked out OK.

[LedRush]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but Jeter has NOT fallen off. He was hurt last year, is all. In his last full season, he hit above his lifetime average led the league in hits! I have complete and utter faith he'll hit at least .290. Hardly falling off, if you ask me.

 

He is making the argument that despite incredibly good fielding percentage and gold gloves, Jeter's range makes him the shittiest shortstop ever to play the game (defensively).

Yep. That's exactly what I'm arguing.

 

What a fabulous, incisive post! :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

Is Aunt Flow visiting?

[laughedatbytime]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but Jeter has NOT fallen off. He was hurt last year, is all. In his last full season, he hit above his lifetime average led the league in hits! I have complete and utter faith he'll hit at least .290. Hardly falling off, if you ask me.

 

He is making the argument that despite incredibly good fielding percentage and gold gloves, Jeter's range makes him the shittiest shortstop ever to play the game (defensively).

Yep. That's exactly what I'm arguing.

 

What a fabulous, incisive post! :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

Is Aunt Flow visiting?

No....I'm just a little jealous since I appear to have missed out on the great deal on straw you got.

[FountainOfSyrinx]

via @ESPNStatsInfo: Via @EliasSports, Derek Jeter has played in 2,602 games. NYY was mathematically eliminated from playoffs in only 1 of those (9/26/08 at BOS).

 

 

Almost hard to imagine/believe that stat is true. Remarkable.

[LedRush]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but Jeter has NOT fallen off. He was hurt last year, is all. In his last full season, he hit above his lifetime average led the league in hits! I have complete and utter faith he'll hit at least .290. Hardly falling off, if you ask me.

 

He is making the argument that despite incredibly good fielding percentage and gold gloves, Jeter's range makes him the shittiest shortstop ever to play the game (defensively).

Yep. That's exactly what I'm arguing.

 

What a fabulous, incisive post! :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

Is Aunt Flow visiting?

No....I'm just a little jealous since I appear to have missed out on the great deal on straw you got.

 

You took my summary of what you were saying seriously? Jesus, lighten up.

[laughedatbytime]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but Jeter has NOT fallen off. He was hurt last year, is all. In his last full season, he hit above his lifetime average led the league in hits! I have complete and utter faith he'll hit at least .290. Hardly falling off, if you ask me.

 

He is making the argument that despite incredibly good fielding percentage and gold gloves, Jeter's range makes him the shittiest shortstop ever to play the game (defensively).

Yep. That's exactly what I'm arguing.

 

What a fabulous, incisive post! :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

Is Aunt Flow visiting?

No....I'm just a little jealous since I appear to have missed out on the great deal on straw you got.

 

You took my summary of what you were saying seriously? Jesus, lighten up.

If you weren't serious then I stand corrected.

 

Better yet if it was a veiled criticism of traditional fielding statistics and a mockery of those who vote for the GGs.

Edited February 20, 2014 by laughedatbytime

[LedRush]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but Jeter has NOT fallen off. He was hurt last year, is all. In his last full season, he hit above his lifetime average led the league in hits! I have complete and utter faith he'll hit at least .290. Hardly falling off, if you ask me.

 

He is making the argument that despite incredibly good fielding percentage and gold gloves, Jeter's range makes him the shittiest shortstop ever to play the game (defensively).

Yep. That's exactly what I'm arguing.

 

What a fabulous, incisive post! :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

Is Aunt Flow visiting?

No....I'm just a little jealous since I appear to have missed out on the great deal on straw you got.

 

You took my summary of what you were saying seriously? Jesus, lighten up.

If you weren't serious then I stand corrected.

 

Better yet if it was a veiled criticism of traditional fielding statistics and a mockery of those who vote for the GGs.

 

I 100% wasn't serious that that was your position, though I did want to convey:

 

1. You were talking about defense

2. That I don't put too much stock in the new fielding statistics

[laughedatbytime]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but Jeter has NOT fallen off. He was hurt last year, is all. In his last full season, he hit above his lifetime average led the league in hits! I have complete and utter faith he'll hit at least .290. Hardly falling off, if you ask me.

 

He is making the argument that despite incredibly good fielding percentage and gold gloves, Jeter's range makes him the shittiest shortstop ever to play the game (defensively).

Yep. That's exactly what I'm arguing.

 

What a fabulous, incisive post! :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

Is Aunt Flow visiting?

No....I'm just a little jealous since I appear to have missed out on the great deal on straw you got.

 

You took my summary of what you were saying seriously? Jesus, lighten up.

If you weren't serious then I stand corrected.

 

Better yet if it was a veiled criticism of traditional fielding statistics and a mockery of those who vote for the GGs.

 

I 100% wasn't serious that that was your position, though I did want to convey:

 

1. You were talking about defense

2. That I don't put too much stock in the new fielding statistics

Fair enough...you fooled me.

 

But I would be interested (though this might not be the place to do it) why you're not a fan of the new fielding statistics.

 

They are based on more information than the traditional statistics and would appear to be based on information relevant to the defensive value of a player, therefore they should add to the sum total of the knowledge of a player. What, in your opinion, is not true about that statement?

[LedRush]

Derek Jeter's a legitimately great player. Drawing lines at 190 hits and putting in something like a slugging percentage of .400 is a mostly meaningless stat, like proving Palmeiro was one of the top HR hitters of all time by listing players with the most seasons hitting at least 38 HRs.

 

Not to mention that others whose fielding prowess fell off as badly as Jeter;s did in his later years got moved out of the position and had no chance to add to their hit totals.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but Jeter has NOT fallen off. He was hurt last year, is all. In his last full season, he hit above his lifetime average led the league in hits! I have complete and utter faith he'll hit at least .290. Hardly falling off, if you ask me.

 

He is making the argument that despite incredibly good fielding percentage and gold gloves, Jeter's range makes him the shittiest shortstop ever to play the game (defensively).

Yep. That's exactly what I'm arguing.

 

What a fabulous, incisive post! :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

Is Aunt Flow visiting?

No....I'm just a little jealous since I appear to have missed out on the great deal on straw you got.

 

You took my summary of what you were saying seriously? Jesus, lighten up.

If you weren't serious then I stand corrected.

 

Better yet if it was a veiled criticism of traditional fielding statistics and a mockery of those who vote for the GGs.

 

I 100% wasn't serious that that was your position, though I did want to convey:

 

1. You were talking about defense

2. That I don't put too much stock in the new fielding statistics

Fair enough...you fooled me.

 

But I would be interested (though this might not be the place to do it) why you're not a fan of the new fielding statistics.

 

They are based on more information than the traditional statistics and would appear to be based on information relevant to the defensive value of a player, therefore they should add to the sum total of the knowledge of a player. What, in your opinion, is not true about that statement?

 

I think the problem for me is twofold:

 

1. people often treat them as gospel, when, in fact, the new stats don't account for the many differences in each team's decision or in how each ball is hit or how fast a play needs to be made based on the situation

 

2. they contradict what I see with my own eyes

 

Yes, they provide more information than before, but the limitations of traditional fielding statistics are immediately evident, while the limitations of the new ones seem much more hidden (perhaps because of their complexity and subjective nature).