[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by BobC

Did Bill James ever see him play in person, or even have video/TV clips to see how he actually played? There's a lot to be said about how the contemporaries of players may have a lot better handle on how good they actually are/were for the time. Also, the stats and numbers people like James use are borne and derived from the more modern game, and IMO do not properly or fully take in the context and changes that have occurred over the years.

The use of modern statistics has a bit of an inbred bias IMO, in that it is a more accurate measure of the modern game and doesn't always reflect what is truly significant or important for a different period of time. I love hearing how a lot of these modern know-it-all types will always say things like how this player or that player couldn't hold a candle to a player from today, and how bad that long-ago player would perform if they suited up today. What they don't realize is that if their favorite player from today was to go back 100-120 years and suit up to play back then, they'd possibly get their ass kicked. But because the people and players from back then aren't still around to tell such people to STFU, they smugly get away with their claims because they know they can never definitively be proven wrong. And it doesn't matter that they can never be definitively proven right either, they just keep shouting down anyone who doesn't think like and agree with them. Really sad it is like that, and to me indicates a lack of understanding and intelligence.

Ruth Speaker Wagner Gehrig Cobb Hornsby and many others do JUST FINE under sabermetrics. Sisler is the only one I can think of he rates notably lower than some of the traditional rankings, maybe Heilmann too.