Jump to content

Since They Became An Official Stat


DrungoHazewood

Recommended Posts

""Since 1969 (when saves became an official stat), there have been two AL position players to earn a win or a save in a game, and both were @Orioles:

05/06/2012, Chris Davis win at Bos
07/25/2019, Stevie Wilkerson save at LAA#Birdland"

Stealing this Tweet/quote from @bobmc in another thread.

A little rant here...  I cannot stand when MLB uses the bolded disclaimer.  They do that fairly often.  For example, RBI weren't an official stat until 1920.  So according to MLB nobody had an official RBI until 1920.  They don't count RBI records before 1920.  By MLB orthodoxy Ty Cobb didn't lead the league with 127 RBI in 1911, because there were no RBI.

Same thing here.  Nobody had a save until 1969.  Except that Jerome Holtzman invented saves in 1959.  And the original Baseball Encyclopedia retroactively figured saves for essentially every single game going back to 1871.  But as far as Major League Baseball's official records go Hoyt Wilhelm had 30 career saves, not 228.

I mentioned in the Stevie Wilkerson thread that Jimmy Dykes had a game in late 1927 where he started in the field, then pitched the 9th inning of a 3-2 win.  On bb-ref he has a save. In The Baseball Encyclopedia he has a save.  on Fangraphs he has a save.  On the Baseball Cube he has a save.  But MLB and Stats Inc can Tweet with a straight face that this kind of thing never happened before last night.

It's awesome that Wilkerson got a save in a game where he played center field.  But it's happened before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

""Since 1969 (when saves became an official stat), there have been two AL position players to earn a win or a save in a game, and both were @Orioles:

05/06/2012, Chris Davis win at Bos
07/25/2019, Stevie Wilkerson save at LAA#Birdland"

Stealing this Tweet/quote from @bobmc in another thread.

A little rant here...  I cannot stand when MLB uses the bolded disclaimer.  They do that fairly often.  For example, RBI weren't an official stat until 1920.  So according to MLB nobody had an official RBI until 1920.  They don't count RBI records before 1920.  By MLB orthodoxy Ty Cobb didn't lead the league with 127 RBI in 1911, because there were no RBI.

Same thing here.  Nobody had a save until 1969.  Except that Jerome Holtzman invented saves in 1959.  And the original Baseball Encyclopedia retroactively figured saves for essentially every single game going back to 1871.  But as far as Major League Baseball's official records go Hoyt Wilhelm had 30 career saves, not 228.

I mentioned in the Stevie Wilkerson thread that Jimmy Dykes had a game in late 1927 where he started in the field, then pitched the 9th inning of a 3-2 win.  On bb-ref he has a save. In The Baseball Encyclopedia he has a save.  on Fangraphs he has a save.  On the Baseball Cube he has a save.  But MLB and Stats Inc can Tweet with a straight face that this kind of thing never happened before last night.

It's awesome that Wilkerson got a save in a game where he played center field.  But it's happened before.

Excellent post, and it continues today, when Manfred says, with a straight face, that they aren’t manipulating the baseballs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

29 minutes ago, TonySoprano said:

Good post.  I remember the articles about when "Pujols passed Babe Ruth on the RBI list" earlier this year.   https://www.mlb.com/news/albert-pujols-passes-babe-ruth-in-rbis   Pujols is actually 173 behind Ruth.  https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/RBI_career.shtml

By MLB.com Babe Ruth has 2213 RBI.  By bb-ref he has 2214.  By bb-ref Pujols has 2041.  By MLB.com Pujols has 2041.

They're not even internally consistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

""Since 1969 (when saves became an official stat), there have been two AL position players to earn a win or a save in a game, and both were @Orioles:

05/06/2012, Chris Davis win at Bos
07/25/2019, Stevie Wilkerson save at LAA#Birdland"

Stealing this Tweet/quote from @bobmc in another thread.

A little rant here...  I cannot stand when MLB uses the bolded disclaimer.  They do that fairly often.  For example, RBI weren't an official stat until 1920.  So according to MLB nobody had an official RBI until 1920.  They don't count RBI records before 1920.  By MLB orthodoxy Ty Cobb didn't lead the league with 127 RBI in 1911, because there were no RBI.

Same thing here.  Nobody had a save until 1969.  Except that Jerome Holtzman invented saves in 1959.  And the original Baseball Encyclopedia retroactively figured saves for essentially every single game going back to 1871.  But as far as Major League Baseball's official records go Hoyt Wilhelm had 30 career saves, not 228.

I mentioned in the Stevie Wilkerson thread that Jimmy Dykes had a game in late 1927 where he started in the field, then pitched the 9th inning of a 3-2 win.  On bb-ref he has a save. In The Baseball Encyclopedia he has a save.  on Fangraphs he has a save.  On the Baseball Cube he has a save.  But MLB and Stats Inc can Tweet with a straight face that this kind of thing never happened before last night.

It's awesome that Wilkerson got a save in a game where he played center field.  But it's happened before.

I see what you're saying, but what if they just said "in the last 40 years" or "since 1969."  We have all kinds of discussions on here that qualify performance by things like "the dead ball era, pre-DH," etc.  I think the "stat" while meaningless (it's not like the O's are grooming non-pitchers to pitch in save situations) is still interesting in the way that most coincidences are interesting.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, TonySoprano said:

Good post.  I remember the articles about when "Pujols passed Babe Ruth on the RBI list" earlier this year.   https://www.mlb.com/news/albert-pujols-passes-babe-ruth-in-rbis   Pujols is actually 173 behind Ruth.  https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/RBI_career.shtml

I'm actually shocked that A-Rod is #3 all-time and Barry Bonds didn't break 2000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a media age when catching eyeballs and generating clicks is paramount to an outlet's existence (MLB, ESPN, BleacherReport, et al.), being able to scream in large letters "Sets a New Record," "First Ever to Achieve...," or "Worst Ever!" is one way to get those eyeballs and clicks.  It comes as NO surprise that the writers of those articles would jimmy stats -- without actually resorting to flat out prevarication -- to support their headlines...

First Position Player to Record a Save!

(since 1969)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don’t get the issue here...no position player has had a save from 1969 until last night with Wilkerson. 

I will note that RBI is a bit of a different stat than  the Save in that a position was specifically created/popularized for the Save around the time the stat was created. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



  • Posts

    • Soto has been fine since his first couple appearances and appears to be picking up steam. That makes seven. Problem is Cano has been the most reliable and all of a sudden looked terrible twice in a row. Hopefully he can get in one decent appearance in the final series.
    • So It's 13 pitchers for the Wild card round? What position player are you dropping?
    • There have been 2-3 times when it seemed logical to call him up but they don’t.   I’ve never understood this thing they have for Baker.  Hey, Cole Irvin is available again!!
    • While we lost some talented players, I think the consensus was some of the players we lost were actually blocking more talented prospects. The loss of Westburg and Urias should have been mostly offset by Holliday and Mayo. Instead, they were truly abysmal.  Povich had some nice moments but he was disappointing as well.  Maybe our expectations were too high - Elias is not going to hit on every prospect, and even the ones that turn out good may take a while to adjust. Still, I think it is fair to have expected more out of Mayo and Holliday since the organization deemed them ready to promote.  In addition to the prospects, you had Adley hit a wall, going from a 6 WAR pace to replacement level, and Cowser and O'Hearn both struggling.  Certainly injuries hurt us, but we should have been strong enough to overcome them. Maybe not to sustain a 105 win pace but I think it is fair to say we should have been able to beat 95 wins and win the division even with the injuries.  
    • I was wondering what the knee-jerk reaction would be to an ugly game last night, but the truth is that the bullpen is fine, as is the rest of the team. We lack a true lockdown closer, but we have six arms by my count that are very good relievers in Akin, Perez, Coulombe, Webb, Cano, and Domingez. And you can add Suarez to that list next week, and possibly Povich, who should also make the PS roster as a lefty long relief option to mirror Suarez. Anyway, that game could have and would have gone much differently, IMO, if it were a playoff game. Burnes obviously stays in longer and gets at least through the top of the order if not back down to the bottom third to hand it over to the bullpen. Hopefully we'd be able to scratch out some runs, but that's not the bullpen's fault.  This is an extremely good team with a lead. Let's hope we get on the board early and often starting tonight.
    • Boy, Brandon Young who has some decent numbers at Norfolk must be injured or unimpressive to the front office to not even get a look for this bullpen. Bryan Baker is almost a waste of a call up.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...