Most undervalued HOFers

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by G1911

I don't know how many times I can say, and of course nobody can really counter the claim actually made because it is pretty obviously true, that Ryan and Perry produced "pretty similar" value over their careers, arriving there by being different types of pitchers. Of course it is twisting to look at career values (a thing we do not object to when evaluating players performance until and unless it does not suit what we demand to conclude).

Let's just pretend a single game basis is what I said, even though it's not whatsoever. I know Ryan fans believe the single game will be one of his 7 no hitters instead of a game he walks in a bunch of runs, but if I have 1) a player who performed 17% better than average and 2) a player who performed 12% better than average, over basically the exact same very large sample size, I would probably roll the dice with the guy who did 17%. As a rate, Perry was slightly more effective at not giving up runs in context, so of a single game in which I do not have special knowledge of future events or who is at the moment on a hot or cold streak, it makes sense to go with the one slightly better at not giving up runs in context.

I don't think any of your math is wrong (although I think that simplifying everything down to ERA+ is reductionist) and am pretty comfortable with the idea that Gaylord Perry's performance on the field was of similar value to Nolan Ryan's. (Although Perry had some help from substances placed on the ball...)

What I'm confused about is the assumption that value on the field (as measured using metrics that were only identified and used over a decade after both players retired) would directly correlate with card values.

Card values are tied to popularity, which builds over time and is tied to things like memorable moments, milestones etc. Ryan was in many ways, larger than life. His fanbase is as large as almost any player in the past 50 years. The strength, durability etc. captured people imaginations.

Overall statistical success (by whatever metric you consider) is just one factor. And while I'm a fan of metrics such as ERA+ as useful tools, they are one of many ways that people measure a player's career. And I imagine, quite loosely correlated with card value.

Even if you wanted to try and use statistics as the basis for valuation, you would need a more complex mechanism, as it is clear that peak pitching performance is valued over longevity. Take Steve Carlton whose ERA+ of 115 is lower than Perry's or Blyleven's. But his 4 Cy Young Awards have some people considering him as one of the best ever.