Jump to content


Plus Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Frobby

  1. You are aware that Derek Jeter's OPS at ages 32 and 33 have been higher than they were at ages 28-31, right? That he declined significantly 4 straight years and then reversed course? Look, if you want to talk about probabilities, and argue that Tejada probably won't see .850 again, that's fine. But the way you put it, it's just a completely foregone conclusion, and that's just wrong.
  2. We will just have to agree to disagree here. To me, Brock would have been a Hall of Famer regardless of his WS performances, but the Series show he put on is certainly a very big cherry on top of his sundae.
  3. I think they are both overrated around here. How do you like them apples!
  4. We are a long way from that. But the bigger mistake was to sign Miggy and not follow it up with another Grade A bat at a power position.
  5. I think I made it pretty clear that a couple of World Series by itself doesn't put a guy in the Hall of Fame. But it can be a major factor, and I don't think there is anything wrong with that. It may just be that the 1967-68 World Series were played when I was 10-11 years old and that they were all day games that I watched on TV. But Brock's performance in those 2 series were, in my mind, among the greatest ever. Batting average and OPS don't begin to tell the whole story here, though of course they were part of it. Brock just ran wild (14 SB's in 14 games) and drove the Red Sox and Tig
  6. Well, here is what Bedard himself had to say: By the way, as a public service, check out this website, which I found while looking for Bedard quotes on this subject. I expect major rep points for this!
  7. I will gladly concede you Joe Morgan, Pete Rose and Rod Carew. Needless to say, 2 of those were first ballot HOFers and the other would have been if he didn't break baseball's cardinal rule and then lie about it for 2 decades. The others are guys who had a few good years, then fizzled. As you know, with only a very few exceptions, the Hall is largely about being excellent over a career of 15+ years. So I won't argue about whether Ron LeFlore or Bill North had a couple of seasons where they arguably were as good as Brock. One other thing: there is a place in the Hall for players who were
  8. I disagree with both the generalities and the specifics of your post. Ron Santo may be underrated, but there are very few fans from that era who would not realize tha the was a much better player than Maury Wills. Santo in his prime was probably a better overall player than Brooks Robinson. He was a 9-time all-star (Wills was a 5-time all-star). Put it this way: in the period Brock played (1960-1979), who was a better leadoff hitter? In my opinion, he's first by a mile. Moreover, winning matters. His teams won, and he was a big reason why.
  9. To me, the biggest value of sabermetrics in HOF discussions is identifying players who didn't get much attention but deserve consideration. You didn't need sabermetrics to understand that Brock was a great player. And yes, I mean great. He was a totally disruptive force, played great on baseball's biggest stage and was a key component of some really great teams.
  10. When I read this, I went to check your profile to see how old you are. There is almost nobody alive who watched Lou Brock's career who would agree with you. 3000 hits is an automatic ticket to the Hall, but even if Brock didn't have that credential, he would have been a shoe-in. He held the all-time record for stolen bases, breaking a record that Ty Cobb had held for a half-century. He held the record for most stolen bases in a season. He led the league in stolen bases 8 times. He led the league at least once in singles, doubles, triples, and runs. He was a six-time all star and receive
  11. I have to say that when the O's either make a trade or don't make a trade, it always makes me happy when the guys we didn't get (or traded away) don't do too well. Imagine if Santana was 11-3 right now, the gnashing of teeth around here would be unbearable.
  12. No hit for Nick last night, but he did knock in his 14th run in 15 July games. He is now on pace for 99 RBI on the year. Barring injury I will be shocked if he isn't well over 100 by the time the year is done. He gets plenty of RBI opportunities (9th in the AL in AB w/RISP) and just needs to cash them in at a respectable rate.
  13. The American Jewish Historical Society sells a set of baseball cards (made by or for them) of every Jewish player who even appeared in the major leagues from the beginning of MLB until a year or two ago. A lot of players with 5 or 10 AB, and just a handful of really good players. The list of current players is actually pretty impressive. However, it doesn't really work to call Youkilis the Jewish God of Walks.
  14. The 500 HR club has grown much faster than the 3000 hit club and I suspect that will continue to be the case. And I think the 300-win club is going to be closed entirely for a good long while after Glaving and maybe Randy Johnson make it. In 10 years 250 wins will be seen the way 300 wins used to be seen. As to Nick's chances of the HOF, look at it this way. Every year, an average of 2-3 players make the Hall. That means that every year, on average 2-3 players entering baseball eventually will make the Hall. So if you look at all the players who broke in last year and assigned them odds
  15. I think the 2004 Red Sox are a pretty good example of what you are saying. From a statistical standpoint Nomar Garciaparra's offense made up for his defensive shortcomings, but given the heavy-hitting makeup of that particular team it turned out to be better to have a defense-first shortstop, so they traded Nomar and won the World Series.
  16. I would have to agree that Tejada's offense has not been "great" this year in comparison with the league average. So, you have to form an opinion as to whether going forward Tejada's offense will be closer to his performance over the last 3 years or his performance in the first 69 games of this year. But either way, his offense is great compared to Gomez/Fahey/Hernandez.
  17. I wouldn't. If the best hitting prospect your system churns out in a decade is Brady Anderson or Paul O'Neill, you aren't going very far. Those are very good players but not at the level Nick needs to be at. He doesn't have to be a Hall of Famer but he has to be a guy who at his peak is a serious MVP candidate.
  18. 94th of 165 is certainly decent, for purposes of this discussion (i.e., who you would expect to have the most AB). We aren't discussing here how we want to Nick to improve, we are talking about why he is no. 8 in the AL in hits.
  19. He is learning that. His OPS right now is 100 points higher than on this same day last year. His lowest monthly OPS this year was far higher than what he did in April and May last year. You might still say he had a somewhat slow start in 2007, but it certainly was far from awful.
  20. Although I think Nick will have some (possibly many) years where he exceeds 39 doubles, 25 HR's and 104 RBI, averaging that over a very long career is very difficult. Musial's "average" totals skew low because he played from ages 38-42 at a much lower level than he had played previously. Musial is 3rd all time in doubles, 2d in total bases, 3rd in extra base hits. You really think Markakis will approach that?
  21. Ok, so I was a little off, but my point was that he walks a decent amount. He's not like Juan Pierre. Nick is 15th in AB's and has more walks than 10 of the 14 guys in front of him.
  22. Yes, a little. 1. The lower in the order, the fewer the plate appearances. I would think there are a couple of leadoff hitters who play close to every day. 2. The better the team's offense, the more plate appearances. O's are not good in this dept. 3. High AB's normally mean very few walks. Markakis walks a respectable amount. 4. A lot of hits = high batting average. .295 is nice but there are many guys higher. With all that, I would have thought there would be more than 7 guys who could beat out a .295 hitter who has started all but 2 games batting 2nd or 3rd for a poor offensive
  23. I refer you to this thread and the article linked to it: http://www.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46634&highlight=defense+article
  24. I agree. It is perfectly logical. If you are a weak-armed SS, why position yourelf to get to balls in an area where you couldn't make the throw even if you reached it? You may as well play more up the middle and get to more balls there where you can throw it. Conversely, if you have a stronger arm, it makes sense to shade a little more towards the hole since you can make the throws from there, but it will cost you getting to some balls up the middle. Now, it could be argued that Miggy should forget about those balls in the hole and shade more up the middle because he is missing out on mor
  • Create New...