Any player cards you dont collect because of morals

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by packs

I feel like Tony probably got better because pitching got worse as his career went on.

That is beyond laughable to me. The 5 years he was age 28-32 his batting average averaged .318 in what is the prime years of most athletes. Then the 5 years from age 33-37 he averaged .369 over the years most are seriously declining.

If this wasn't good guy Tony Gwynn would adding 51 points to their batting average in their later years be totally ignored? If it was bad pitching the entire league average should have went through the roof.

and that is all I have to say on the subject.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by bnorth

That is beyond laughable to me. The 5 years he was age 28-32 his batting average averaged .318 in what is the prime years of most athletes. Then the 5 years from age 33-37 he averaged .369 over the years most are seriously declining.

If this wasn't good guy Tony Gwynn would adding 51 points to their batting average in their later years be totally ignored? If it was bad pitching the entire league average should have went through the roof.

and that is all I have to say on the subject.

I have no interest in Gwynn being clean or dirty, but for the record, the league did go through the roof in 1993, Gwynn’s age 33 season. We went from 3.88 runs per game to 4.49, batting averages jumped 12 points, OPS jumped 42. They stayed high for a number of years after, 1993 marks a significant leaping point in NL offense.

[packs]

Originally Posted by bnorth

That is beyond laughable to me. The 5 years he was age 28-32 his batting average averaged .318 in what is the prime years of most athletes. Then the 5 years from age 33-37 he averaged .369 over the years most are seriously declining.

If this wasn't good guy Tony Gwynn would adding 51 points to their batting average in their later years be totally ignored? If it was bad pitching the entire league average should have went through the roof.

and that is all I have to say on the subject.

Why is it laughable? One of those 28 to 32 seasons he hit 313 but also led the league in hitting and led the league in hitting the next season too.

National League average ERA from 1988 to 1992:

3.45
3.49
3.79
3.68
3.50

National League average ERA from 1993 to 1997:

4.04
4.21
4.18
4.21
4.20

Tony Gwynn was not everyone. He was one of the most talented hitters of all time. Pitching did get worse so why wouldn't an already elite hitter not get better?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by packs

Why is it laughable? One of those 28 to 32 seasons he hit 313 but also led the league in hitting and led the league in hitting the next season too.

National League average ERA from 1988 to 1992:

3.45
3.49
3.79
3.68
3.50

National League average ERA from 1993 to 1997:

4.04
4.21
4.18
4.21
4.20

Tony Gwynn was not everyone. He was one of the most talented hitters of all time. Pitching did get worse so why wouldn't an already elite hitter not get better?

Wouldn't posting the actual batting average during that time be WAY more relevant since that is what is being discussed. ERA is for pitchers.

[packs]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Wouldn't posting the actual batting average during that time be WAY more relevant since that is what is being discussed. ERA is for pitchers.

Are you suggesting there's no link between worse pitching and an elite hitter's rising batting average? Does rising league average ERA not indicate pitching declined as his career went on?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by packs

Are you suggesting there's no link between worse pitching and an elite hitter's rising batting average? Does rising league average ERA not indicate pitching declined as his career went on?

There is a link but if we are just using things with links why not total bases?

[packs]

I feel like you think I'm being arbitrary but there was a statistical decline in pitching because pitching got worse. It makes sense that an elite hitter would get better if the average pitcher is worse. I don't see why that's laughable. That's what I would expect to happen.

[BobbyStrawberry]

I never collected his cards anyway, but I'm guessing there aren't too many Felipe Vazquez collectors on here. He's one guy I'm not interested in collecting....

[G1911]

If the claim is that “pitching got worse”, then using ERA makes sense. It’s the standard criteria of effectiveness for pitchers, and the core claim made was about pitchers.

I don’t think pitching just gets worse one year, I think we’re seeing the growing effect of steroid proliferation and expansion.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by packs

I feel like you think I'm being arbitrary but there was a statistical decline in pitching because pitching got worse. It makes sense that an elite hitter would get better if the average pitcher is worse. I don't see why that's laughable. That's what I would expect to happen.

I don't think you're being arbitrary, but did you ever realize and consider that the NL expansion and addition ot two more teams, the Colorado Rockies and Florida Marlins, just happened to also occur in 1993, the exact same year you noted the NL change in average ERA? Pitching may not have necessarily gotten worse, but obviously became more diluted due to the expansion. Also, the continuing and possibly expanding use of PEDs, and maybe a particular new PED coming out around that same time, could also be a contributing factor to the increasing ERAs. Hey, if nothing else, simply adding the Colorado Rockies with their mile high altitude and thin air into the NL is going to have at least a small impact on the overall NL average ERA, don't you think?

[BobC]

Originally Posted by bnorth

That is beyond laughable to me. The 5 years he was age 28-32 his batting average averaged .318 in what is the prime years of most athletes. Then the 5 years from age 33-37 he averaged .369 over the years most are seriously declining.

If this wasn't good guy Tony Gwynn would adding 51 points to their batting average in their later years be totally ignored? If it was bad pitching the entire league average should have went through the roof.

and that is all I have to say on the subject.

Obviously your insinuation is he was taking PEDs or doing something else along the lines of cheating. If PEDs, I've seriously asked this question before. Knowing how PEDs apparently effect muscles and strength, please explain then how taking them can have such a dramatic effect on someone's batting average, but as is the case with Gwynn, seemingly no such dramatic effect on his hitting home runs, which seems to be the one constant similar factor among all PED using players other than pitchers. I've never come across anyone yet that can provide a reasonable or logical explanation as to how increased strength alone can also so dramatically increase one's eyesight, hand-eye coordination, and the like, that are tremendous factors in helping with a player's batting average.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by BobC

Obviously your insinuation is he was taking PEDs or doing something else along the lines of cheating. If PEDs, I've seriously asked this question before. Knowing how PEDs apparently effect muscles and strength, please explain then how taking them can have such a dramatic effect on someone's batting average, but as is the case with Gwynn, seemingly no such dramatic effect on his hitting home runs,

His two best homer seasons came when he was 37 & 38 years old, the former representing a 467% increase over the season prior and just his 2nd double digit season out of 11. He had 3 consecutive double digit seasons from 37-39 after 2 in his first 15 seasons.

So, yes, there was a dramatic increase.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Tabe

His two best homer seasons came when he was 37 & 38 years old, the former representing a 467% increase over the season prior and just his 2nd double digit season out of 11. He had 3 consecutive double digit seasons from 37-39 after 2 in his first 15 seasons.

So, yes, there was a dramatic increase.

Valid points Chris. I guess it is hard for me to think in terms of someone being so helped by PEDs in hitting home runs when those monumental numbers for them amount to only 16 or 17 home runs for an entire year. LOL

Of course, there is still the argument that Gwynn had such a fantastic eye and ability to hit for a high average that couldn't there also be a possibility that he just decided to try going for more home runs? At that point in time the home run was becoming THE thing in baseball, with the PED era really taking off around that time as well. Rather than comparing Gwynn to the likes of Bonds, McGwire and Sosa, maybe it would be more appropriate to compare him to Cobb, who actually due to average and hitting ability has a much more likely connection and comparability as a hitter? Cobb actually did a somewhat similar thing as Gwynn for a couple years later in his career as well. Most noticeably in 1925 when Cobb hit 12 homers for the year, up from just 4 the prior year (300% increase). That season, when he was 38 I believe, included the two-game stretch where Cobb suddenly put up 5 homers over two back-to-back games. A feat and MLB record he still owns part of, and which even Ruth didn't equal if I remember correctly. And there is also the story/legend of Cobb supposedly telling a reporter to watch him show people how he could hit home runs if he wanted to. Cobb also did a similar jump in 1921 at the age of 34 when he equaled his same single season home run high of 12 as well. That time he improved on a prior year total of only 2 home runs, for a 600% percent increase, blowing even Gwynn's 467% single season jump out of the water.

There are a number of things that have been said about Cobb and that he was accused of during his career, but I don't think taking PEDs was ever one of them. To my knowledge, I don't think Gwynn was ever proven to have taken PEDs, nor failed a drug test. And just look at his batting average over the four prior seasons before his 'power surge" of hitting 17 homers. The man could flat out hit, and like Cobb, led his league and the entire majors in average over multiple seasons. Now if you want to debate about whether Gwynn's high averages were possibly the result of taking PEDs as well, that is possibly a different argument/discussion, maybe.

I honestly don't know. And since his passing, we'll never hear it from him either. At least before his passing, he spoke out and took blame for not doing or saying more against the PED movement, along with laying blame to all of MLB for not doing/saying more against it as well. That never sounded to me like someone who partook in the taking of PEDs themself.

[BobC]

Double post!

[Koufax32fan]

Well, that was a weird few minutes; I learned way too much about some very bad people - I have done a lot of reading about baseball history, and can't believe I didn't ever hear about or remember Marty Bergen. I do have his brother Bill's T206 card.

Ok, what's the deal with Led Zeppelin?

And - disclosure here, I am a Chicagoan of a certain age so MJ was, is and always will be the greatest basketball player in history - I am surprised by LeBron being mentioned and not Kobe.

Back in the early 2000's, I was a lawyer for a company that had a business lawsuit in Denver, Colorado. We had the same lawyer who represented Kobe. I respect my (former) outside counsel for taking his case and she did a great job for us (and for him), but I lost all respect for Kobe after that. I don't collect basketball cards, but I would not spend a shekel (or even a nickel) on a Kobe card.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Koufax32fan

Well, that was a weird few minutes; I learned way too much about some very bad people - I have done a lot of reading about baseball history, and can't believe I didn't ever hear about or remember Marty Bergen. I do have his brother Bill's T206 card.

Ok, what's the deal with Led Zeppelin?

And - disclosure here, I am a Chicagoan of a certain age so MJ was, is and always will be the greatest basketball player in history - I am surprised by LeBron being mentioned and not Kobe.

Back in the early 2000's, I was a lawyer for a company that had a business lawsuit in Denver, Colorado. We had the same lawyer who represented Kobe. I respect my (former) outside counsel for taking his case and she did a great job for us (and for him), but I lost all respect for Kobe after that. I don't collect basketball cards, but I would not spend a shekel (or even a nickel) on a Kobe card.

I had a girlfriend who knew the prosecutor on the other side of the Kobe case and I would agree with you knowing the details of that case. Disgusting.

Amazing how so many people and organizations that purport to support women gave him a pass on that rape. Definitely a case of selective narrative cuz Kobe.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

I had a girlfriend who knew the prosecutor on the other side of the Kobe case and I would agree with you knowing the details of that case. Disgusting.

Amazing how so many people and organizations that purport to support women gave him a pass on that rape. Definitely a case of selective narrative cuz Kobe.

Yeah, I don't see how anybody could read the full, complete details of that case and come away thinking Kobe was innocent.

[Prof]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

I had a girlfriend who knew the prosecutor on the other side of the Kobe case and I would agree with you knowing the details of that case. Disgusting.

Amazing how so many people and organizations that purport to support women gave him a pass on that rape. Definitely a case of selective narrative cuz Kobe.

I've only read the somewhat detailed descriptions of that case that are available publicly, and it was pretty messed up. He absolutely got a pass, and people have really glossed over it at this point.

I never liked him before that case. That cemented my dislike for him. And I never liked his contrived mamba stuff afterward either.

I wouldn't collect his stuff for myself. But, if I ever found something very cheap that I could flip, I'd buy it and flip it.



I really don't see what anyone would have against LeBron though. I'm not even a fan of his, but he's been squeaky clean his entire life. No scandals at all.

The worst thing he did was The Decision special, and maybe he was a little odd about Hong Kong/China stuff a few years ago.

[sreader3]

For me it comes down to one's sense of what constitutes an endorsement. Is one endorsing or ratifying an athlete’s character by collecting his cards? Or is collecting done for other reasons, such as an historical accounting, a desire to finish a set, or other factors unrelated to a player’s character? I take the latter view. I don’t think that people endorse or ratify a player’s actions just because they collect his cards. So I will continue to acquire Hal Chase, Pete Rose and—if a set collection should ever require—O.J. Simpson and any other psychopath.