Christmas Day Trivia

[familytoad]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

Klein and Ott were at least intentionally taking advantage of what their ballparks offered them, which is what they were supposed to have been doing. Walker and Helton, in contrast, were by comparison dropped off at a place where they could essentially play their home games in little league as full grown adults! What would Joey Gallo have been able to do playing his home games at the Baker Bowl? .228 and 50 HR's?

No one is "penalizing anyone" for where they play, but instead, are simply taking home/away stats as an additional factor in measuring how really good or great a given player ACTUALLY was.

'Nuff said,

Larry

Okay, you took my elected HOFer examples and rewarded them for playing well in their ballparks (which included elevated home park statistics)...then you took two other players and said we need to discount their elevated home statistics

You seem to want it both ways. You may not call it penalizing, but that’s what you are doing.

The idea that is lost here is that a lot of players must have been helped by playing in favorable hitting parks. They aren’t being mentioned because they didn’t excel to the extent that Walker and Helton did, or how Ott and Klein did.

We could just admire the facts that these players (all 4 specified in this debate, but thrown in Harold Baines too) are special players who compiled big stat lines, higher than most others in the era they played in.
We don’t have to hypothetically dismiss Colorado hitting or defend Polo Grounds short right field at all.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I think it's one of those things that's only going to generate reexamination of the numbers when it's an extreme, across the board phenomenon like Coors and hitting. When it's more in the nature of individual players being tailored to individual parks, much less so, in part because as Larry points out the disparity may be to some extent the result of the player's talent in taking advantage of the park.

For example Wade Boggs with his great bat control just tattooed the left field wall at Fenway. I would give him credit for that, it seems different than Walker and Helton and everyone else just hitting better at Coors.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by familytoad

Okay, you took my elected HOFer examples and rewarded them for playing well in their ballparks (which included elevated home park statistics)...then you took two other players and said we need to discount their elevated home statistics

You seem to want it both ways. You may not call it penalizing, but that’s what you are doing.

The idea that is lost here is that a lot of players must have been helped by playing in favorable hitting parks. They aren’t being mentioned because they didn’t excel to the extent that Walker and Helton did, or how Ott and Klein did.

We could just admire the facts that these players (all 4 specified in this debate, but thrown in Harold Baines too) are special players who compiled big stat lines, higher than most others in the era they played in.
We don’t have to hypothetically dismiss Colorado hitting or defend Polo Grounds short right field at all.

No, Brian. While I don't mean to be argumentative, accuracy is at stake here. The correct term is not "penalizing," it is properly termed "correctly evaluating," with as many analytic factors as possible factored into the process. How are Walker and Helton significantly different (aside from possibly playing more games, thus giving them a quantitative, but not qualitative edge) from the following additional Coors players? Nolan Arenado, career--.320 BA, .984 OPS, 108 HR home vs .263 BA, .787 OPS, 78 HR road; Dante Bichette, career--.328 BA, .938 OPS, 177 HR home vs .269 BA, .730 OPS, 97 HR road; Trevor Story, career--.290 BA, .971 OPS, 55 HR home vs .246, .752 OPS, 33 HR road. And you can go on and on through the history of the Rockies at Coors. The point is that MANY Rockies players developed great to even spectacular stats PRIMARILY BECAUSE THEY PLAYED THEIR HOME GAMES AT COORS FIELD, which made mediocre to good to very good players APPEAR to look like HOF'ers, when their performance under neutral playing conditions quite clearly reveals that they were not in fact great players. This is beyond any rational dispute. They didn't have to adjust their hitting style or approach at the plate to achieve this effect--it was indeed as if they had just been dropped off into a location where they were playing their home games against, if not little league (a bit of a facetious exaggeration), certainly a high level of high school to college level of competition.

Ott, on the other hand, learned to pull the ball more at the Polo Grounds, while changing his style to hit more doubles and triples and for a higher average on the road. Thus the .918 ROAD OPS, marking him clearly as among the true all-time greats (there is almost always an advantage in hitting at home, which the 2015 New York Times Bestseller, "Big Data Baseball," proved statistically to be due to home players receiving more favorable calls on pitches--umps don't like to be booed either!). Klein also pulled the ball to take advantage of Baker Bowl's dimensions, and was able to do so far, far better than any other player who ever played there (and it should be remembered that while he played a maximum of 77 home games there each season, visiting teams and players would play there also 22 times per year). In addition, Klein hit his 4 home runs in one game not at Baker Bowl, but at Pittsburgh's Forbes Field, then one of the largest parks in the major leagues.

Best wishes,

Larry

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

No, Brian. While I don't mean to be argumentative, accuracy is at stake here. The correct term is not "penalizing," it is properly termed "correctly evaluating," with as many analytic factors as possible factored into the process. How are Walker and Helton significantly different (aside from possibly playing more games, thus giving them a quantitative, but not qualitative edge) from the following additional Coors players? Nolan Arenado, career--.320 BA, .984 OPS, 108 HR home vs .263 BA, .787 OPS, 78 HR road; Dante Bichette, career--.328 BA, .938 OPS, 177 HR home vs .269 BA, .730 OPS, 97 HR road; Trevor Story, career--.290 BA, .971 OPS, 55 HR home vs .246, .752 OPS, 33 HR road. And you can go on and on through the history of the Rockies at Coors. The point is that MANY Rockies players developed great to even spectacular stats PRIMARILY BECAUSE THEY PLAYED THEIR HOME GAMES AT COORS FIELD, which made mediocre to good to very good players APPEAR to look like HOF'ers, when their performance under neutral playing conditions quite clearly reveals that they were not in fact great players. This is beyond any rational dispute. They didn't have to adjust their hitting style or approach at the plate to achieve this effect--it was indeed as if they had just been dropped off into a location where they were playing their home games against, if not little league (a bit of a facetious exaggeration), certainly a high level of high school to college level of competition.

Ott, on the other hand, learned to pull the ball more at the Polo Grounds, while changing his style to hit more doubles and triples and for a higher average on the road. Thus the .918 ROAD OPS, marking him clearly as among the true all-time greats (there is almost always an advantage in hitting at home, which the 2015 New York Times Bestseller, "Big Data Baseball," proved statistically to be due to home players receiving more favorable calls on pitches--umps don't like to be booed either!). Klein also pulled the ball to take advantage of Baker Bowl's dimensions, and was able to do so far, far better than any other player who ever played there (and it should be remembered that while he played a maximum of 77 home games there each season, visiting teams and players would play there also 22 times per year). In addition, Klein hit his 4 home runs in one game not at Baker Bowl, but at Pittsburgh's Forbes Field, then one of the largest parks in the major leagues.

Best wishes,

Larry

Klein’s opponents would play 11 games each in the Baker Bowl, not 22.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

No, Brian. While I don't mean to be argumentative, accuracy is at stake here. The correct term is not "penalizing," it is properly termed "correctly evaluating," with as many analytic factors as possible factored into the process. How are Walker and Helton significantly different (aside from possibly playing more games, thus giving them a quantitative, but not qualitative edge) from the following additional Coors players? Nolan Arenado, career--.320 BA, .984 OPS, 108 HR home vs .263 BA, .787 OPS, 78 HR road; Dante Bichette, career--.328 BA, .938 OPS, 177 HR home vs .269 BA, .730 OPS, 97 HR road; Trevor Story, career--.290 BA, .971 OPS, 55 HR home vs .246, .752 OPS, 33 HR road. And you can go on and on through the history of the Rockies at Coors. The point is that MANY Rockies players developed great to even spectacular stats PRIMARILY BECAUSE THEY PLAYED THEIR HOME GAMES AT COORS FIELD, which made mediocre to good to very good players APPEAR to look like HOF'ers, when their performance under neutral playing conditions quite clearly reveals that they were not in fact great players. This is beyond any rational dispute. They didn't have to adjust their hitting style or approach at the plate to achieve this effect--it was indeed as if they had just been dropped off into a location where they were playing their home games against, if not little league (a bit of a facetious exaggeration), certainly a high level of high school to college level of competition.

Ott, on the other hand, learned to pull the ball more at the Polo Grounds, while changing his style to hit more doubles and triples and for a higher average on the road. Thus the .918 ROAD OPS, marking him clearly as among the true all-time greats (there is almost always an advantage in hitting at home, which the 2015 New York Times Bestseller, "Big Data Baseball," proved statistically to be due to home players receiving more favorable calls on pitches--umps don't like to be booed either!). Klein also pulled the ball to take advantage of Baker Bowl's dimensions, and was able to do so far, far better than any other player who ever played there (and it should be remembered that while he played a maximum of 77 home games there each season, visiting teams and players would play there also 22 times per year). In addition, Klein hit his 4 home runs in one game not at Baker Bowl, but at Pittsburgh's Forbes Field, then one of the largest parks in the major leagues.

Best wishes,

Larry

Larry Walker had an OPS of .872 away from Coors Field. If you put him in another stadium for his career and he hit the same, he would have a higher OPS than many Hofers including Boggs, Gwynn, Carew, Kaline, Yaz, Billy Williams, Reggie Jackson, Jim Rice, Banks, Winfield, etc. Coors gave him the advantage of jumping to 15th all time from around 100, so he wasn't some terrible hitter away from Coors with a career OPS+ of 141. He also created value in the field and on the base paths to accumulate 72.7 WAR. Compare that to Klein's career OPS+ of 137 and WAR of 43.6 and Walker is a much more deserving Hofer than Klein or recent inductees like Gwynn, Winfield, Vlad Guererro, Raines and Rice.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by rats60

Larry Walker had an OPS of .872 away from Coors Field. If you put him in another stadium for his career and he hit the same, he would have a higher OPS than many Hofers including Boggs, Gwynn, Carew, Kaline, Yaz, Billy Williams, Reggie Jackson, Jim Rice, Banks, Winfield, etc. Coors gave him the advantage of jumping to 15th all time from around 100, so he wasn't some terrible hitter away from Coors with a career OPS+ of 141. He also created value in the field and on the base paths to accumulate 72.7 WAR. Compare that to Klein's career OPS+ of 137 and WAR of 43.6 and Walker is a much more deserving Hofer than Klein or recent inductees like Gwynn, Winfield, Vlad Guererro, Raines and Rice.

Seriously? Sounds like you're making the wrong comparisons here. Gwynn?

Based on other players that have been enshrined, I think Walker should be in the HOF, even after looking at the amount of fairly bland plate appearances he had for Montreal and St. Louis.

[KCRfan1]

Is too much thought being put into this subject?

This could all be saved going forward by having every ballpark have the same identical dimensions. The ball will be doctored, as it is now, to lessen offense in Texas, Cincinnati, Colorado, Philly, Anaheim, DC, and Yankee Stadium. At the opposite end the ball will be juiced in the parks of the Mets, Mariners, A's, Marlins, Giants, Braves, and Dodgers.

That way everyone will be on the same level so to speak, and we can hand out participation trophy's.

It all seems to be overthought.

Am I missing the mark? Perhaps I am too old school and while I appreciate metrics, it isn't the be all to end all for me. The eye test has usually worked well for me, however I do wear glasses, so.......

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Fred

Seriously? Sounds like you're making the wrong comparisons here. Gwynn?

Based on other players that have been enshrined, I think Walker should be in the HOF, even after looking at the amount of fairly bland plate appearances he had for Montreal and St. Louis.

Tony Gwynn was a singles hitter that hit for a high average. Larry Walker was better in every other phase of the game. He provided more power while still hitting for a high average. His OPS away from Coors was higher than Gwynn's. He was a better fielder, had a better arm and was a better base runner. He had a higher peak. That is why both his bWAR and fWAR as well as JAWs are higher than Gwynn's. It is not meant to be a knock on Gwynn or any of the others on that list, but the point is to show how under rated Walker is.