Negro Leagues Recognized As Major

[triwak]

The equivalence of Negro League talent with AAA talent was simply someone's opinion, way back on the first page of this thread. Quit quoting it, folks! Geez, I don't understand any of the push-back with this. I for one, think this is wonderful news, and WAY overdue! More awesome baseball players and statistics to pour over - AS WE COLLECT THEIR CARDS??? This is gonna be great fun!!

[pgconboy]

Originally Posted by triwak

The equivalence of Negro League talent with AAA talent was simply someone's opinion, way back on the first page of this thread. Quit quoting it, folks! Geez, I don't understand any of the push-back with this. I for one, think this is wonderful news, and WAY overdue! More awesome baseball players and statistics to pour over - AS WE COLLECT THEIR CARDS??? This is gonna be great fun!!

I always visit football reference and only occasionally baseball reference, but it looks like they made it extremely easy.

Buttons that toggle between majors, negros, foreign, minors. Absolutely fantastic. If there is similar functionality across various leader boards what's not to love?

[Exhibitman]

3.1 plate appearances per league game. Works for me as a way of equalizing things. Of course, I am deeply biased because the Dodgers won the 2020 Series and I don't want any damned * on that! Not when I waited 32 friggin' years for it.

[Hankphenom]

I've changed my mind, or I should say this forum has changed my mind. Bottom line for me now: it's the least we can do for those guys! Wonderful, civil, discussion, by the way, never got nasty or personal. Gives me great hope for the country, maybe things are about to get better in that respect.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by triwak

The equivalence of Negro League talent with AAA talent was simply someone's opinion, way back on the first page of this thread. Quit quoting it, folks! Geez, I don't understand any of the push-back with this. I for one, think this is wonderful news, and WAY overdue! More awesome baseball players and statistics to pour over - AS WE COLLECT THEIR CARDS??? This is gonna be great fun!!

Ken,

I don't think anybody disagrees with that. It's the apples to oranges comparison of stats that is being scrutinized.

[drcy]

I like that the top level Negro Leagues is being elevated to the states. Yes, the stats will be problematic, often comparing apples to oranges. However, it's the same comparing stats and records from the 1920s and 2010s. I don't know how you put Cy Young's or Hoss Radbourne's pitching stats in the same spreadsheet with Mariano Rivera and Justin Verlander. Especially, as baseball was THE sport many years ago, that makes the "talent pool" from eras sometimes like apples and oranges. Of course, there are many more international players in MLB today.

[triwak]

Originally Posted by Fred

Ken,

I don't think anybody disagrees with that. It's the apples to oranges comparison of stats that is being scrutinized.

+1

Understood. And I agree that this has been a useful and civil discussion, that will undoubtedly continue. Again, fun!

[t206fix]

Originally Posted by triwak

The equivalence of Negro League talent with AAA talent was simply someone's opinion, way back on the first page of this thread. Quit quoting it, folks! Geez, I don't understand any of the push-back with this. I for one, think this is wonderful news, and WAY overdue! More awesome baseball players and statistics to pour over - AS WE COLLECT THEIR CARDS??? This is gonna be great fun!!

This!

It could be argued that there were some Major League players who lacked the talent to compete on a Negro League team.

And, that Major League statics, pre-integration, were watered down inflated due to the fact that they were not facing the best talent of their generation.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by t206fix

And, that Major League statics, pre-integration, were watered down due to the fact that they were not facing the best talent of their generation.

And, that Negro League statistics, pre-integration, were watered up due to the fact that they were note facing the best talent of their generation?

Works both ways, which is why the Negro Leagues should be considered a Major League. But comparing stats and performance between leagues is problematic at best.

[packs]

Originally Posted by tschock

And, that Negro League statistics, pre-integration, were watered up due to the fact that they were note facing the best talent of their generation?

Works both ways, which is why the Negro Leagues should be considered a Major League. But comparing stats and performance between leagues is problematic at best.

I don't think that's a logical way to look at it. The Negro League players were playing against the highest competition available to them. The MLB players were not.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't think that's a logical way to look at it. The Negro League players were playing against the highest competition available to them. The MLB players were not.

No. THAT doesn't make sense. Both leagues' PLAYERS were playing against the highest competition available to them (the players). Neither could play against the best of both, nor the worst of both, leagues' players. Post integration the lower caliber of players would have been removed (ideally) and we can only estimate the comparison of stats pre-integration.

Maybe you misunderstood my post or are reading something into my post that isn't there?

[packs]

Originally Posted by tschock

No. THAT doesn't make sense. Both leagues' PLAYERS were playing against the highest competition available to them (the players). Neither could play against the best of both, nor the worst of both, leagues' players. Post integration the lower caliber of players would have been removed (ideally) and we can only estimate the comparison of stats pre-integration.

Maybe you misunderstood my post or are reading something into my post that isn't there?

No. That is totally at odds with history. The MLB had every opportunity to play against everybody. If you will recall, they chose to ban players of color from the league. When you say "neither COULD play against the best of both" that is a stretch considering the reason MLB didn't play against the best competition of the era was due to their choice to exclude them.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by packs

No. That is totally at odds with history. The MLB had every opportunity to play against everybody. If you will recall, they chose to ban players of color from the league. When you say "neither COULD play against the best of both" that is a stretch considering the reason MLB didn't play against the best competition of the era was due to their choice to exclude them.

Who is this "MLB" you are talking about? Players or owners? Who ran baseball? Especially back then. Players or owners? The PLAYERS played against the best they were allowed to play against. I'm sorry, not sure what you point is but it doesn't contradict what I saying.

[t206fix]

Originally Posted by tschock

And, that Negro League statistics, pre-integration, were watered up due to the fact that they were note facing the best talent of their generation?

Oops, that's what meant. ML statistics were "watered up". I meant to convey they were inflated.

Negro Leaguers were facing major league quality and minor league quality talent. Same with Major Leaguers.

These players were not excluded from the ML because they lacked talent, it's because they were black. And as Triwak put it, just because someone says they weren't good enough to be in the Majors, doesn't make it true. There is no metric out there right now that can tell us the 11th best player on a NL team was equal to the 15th best player on a ML team. A lot of people out there have opinions, but the only way to prove it is to let them play... oops, too late for that.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by t206fix

These players were not excluded from the ML because they lacked talent, it's because they were black. And as Triwak put it, just because someone says they weren't good enough to be in the Majors, doesn't make it true. There is no metric out there right now that can tell us the 11th best player on a NL team was equal to the 15th best player on a ML team. A lot of people out there have opinions, but the only way to prove it is to let them play... oops, too late for that.

Totally agree. Not that we can't estimate 'greatness', just it's hard to make a direct comparison. I love the way it's done in baseball reference (I believe) which was posted earlier, showing the league affiliation.

I think it's great that the HOF is accepting the NL as another "Major League", just a lot of thought and effort will need to be put into the stats for any meaningful comparison. And even then it will obviously be an estimate of 'greatness'. Jeez, we can't even agree on who the best picture was in a single league within a given year, for one example.

As far as anecdotal/opinions. I've read enough books were 'Joe Dirt said Milt Pappas was the toughest pitcher he ever faced, even tougher than Koufax', that individual opinions mean little. But taken in aggregate they could be meaningful.