Markakis hits 500th double

[ChosenOne21]

Even if they aren't HOF'ers that's good company for sure

[DrungoHazewood]

32 minutes ago, murph said:

Wow (and I know we are taking this misplaced thread way off course, sorry) I thought maybe Drungo made a mistake.  I remember Bichette having some really big years, how could he only have 5.7war, thought you must have looked at just one year.   But, nope, that is correct.   I remember him not being that good defensively, but his dWar is impressive (impressively bad)!  

 

Since I/we have already derailed this I'll make one more off-topic observation.  In '99 Bichette is credited with being a -34 fielder.  That's the 3rd-worst mark of all time in the bb-ref database*.  In '98 he was -4, in '00 he was -2.  There's two explanations I know of for something like that: 1) He was injured or 2) the metrics conspired to give us an unrealistic picture of his defense.  No healthy player is going to go from basically average to historically bad in one year, and the back again.  It would be like a hitter having an OPS of .850 one year, .512 the next, and .875 the next.  Unless he was hurt it can't be 100% right.

* at some point the metrics switch from using DRS for more modern players to Total Zone for those without as much or any play-by-play data available.  I don't know the exact date, but maybe in the 90s or early 2000s.  Generally you get wider spreads in the more recent DRS data, the TZ is more conservative.  So a large percentage of defensive runs saved/allowed records are recent.  It's entirely possible, I think quite likely, that the worst fielders of all time weren't Adam Dunn and Dante Bichette, but instead players from 100+ years ago.

[Mr. Chewbacca Jr.]

39 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Also, look at the career lines of Markakis and BJ Surhoff.  They're virtual twins right now.

34.4 career WAR
2129 vs 2313 games
9218 vs 9106 PA
1110 vs 1062 Runs
2367 vs 2326 hits
22 vs 42 triples
189 vs 188 homers
1037 vs 1153 RBI
884 vs 640 walks
79 vs 81 HBP
1213 vs 839 Ks
210 vs 169 GDP

In context the hitting is a bit off 110 OPS+ for Nick, 98 for Surhoff.

Woah! That's crazy!

[Can_of_corn]

14 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Since I/we have already derailed this I'll make one more off-topic observation.  In '99 Bichette is credited with being a -34 fielder.  That's the 3rd-worst mark of all time in the bb-ref database*.  In '98 he was -4, in '00 he was -2.  There's two explanations I know of for something like that: 1) He was injured or 2) the metrics conspired to give us an unrealistic picture of his defense.  No healthy player is going to go from basically average to historically bad in one year, and the back again.  It would be like a hitter having an OPS of .850 one year, .512 the next, and .875 the next.  Unless he was hurt it can't be 100% right.

* at some point the metrics switch from using DRS for more modern players to Total Zone for those without as much or any play-by-play data available.  I don't know the exact date, but maybe in the 90s or early 2000s.  Generally you get wider spreads in the more recent DRS data, the TZ is more conservative.  So a large percentage of defensive runs saved/allowed records are recent.  It's entirely possible, I think quite likely, that the worst fielders of all time weren't Adam Dunn and Dante Bichette, but instead players from 100+ years ago.

How about 892/569/800?

[murph]

23 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Since I/we have already derailed this I'll make one more off-topic observation.  In '99 Bichette is credited with being a -34 fielder.  That's the 3rd-worst mark of all time in the bb-ref database*.  In '98 he was -4, in '00 he was -2.  There's two explanations I know of for something like that: 1) He was injured or 2) the metrics conspired to give us an unrealistic picture of his defense.  No healthy player is going to go from basically average to historically bad in one year, and the back again.  It would be like a hitter having an OPS of .850 one year, .512 the next, and .875 the next.  Unless he was hurt it can't be 100% right.

* at some point the metrics switch from using DRS for more modern players to Total Zone for those without as much or any play-by-play data available.  I don't know the exact date, but maybe in the 90s or early 2000s.  Generally you get wider spreads in the more recent DRS data, the TZ is more conservative.  So a large percentage of defensive runs saved/allowed records are recent.  It's entirely possible, I think quite likely, that the worst fielders of all time weren't Adam Dunn and Dante Bichette, but instead players from 100+ years ago.

Oh I will take joint responsibility for derailing!  Always enjoy your history and interruptions.  

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

How about 892/569/800?

Who is it?

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, murph said:

Oh I will take joint responsibility for derailing!  Always enjoy your history and interruptions.  

Who is it?

Dunn.

[DrungoHazewood]

20 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

How about 892/569/800?

First thought was George Scott, but he went .839, .473, .716, .821. 

Oh, yea, Adam Dunn.  I think he was mentally injured.  In any case, the number of guys like that could be counted on your fingers.  And I don't think you can slump three wins in the field.  Unless maybe you have money on the other team.

[Can_of_corn]

8 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

First thought was George Scott, but he went .839, .473, .716, .821. 

Oh, yea, Adam Dunn.  I think he was mentally injured.  In any case, the number of guys like that could be counted on your fingers.  And I don't think you can slump three wins in the field.  Unless maybe you have money on the other team.

I just had an example that was someone close to what you were asking for at my fingertips so I shared.

I do think you can slump like that in the field but it would take a case of the yips to do it.

Mostly I think fielding metrics are not good and that retroactively grading fielding has little value. 

[TommyPickles]

Markakis is pulling ahead in one of the great Orioles debates of the last fifteen years:

Who had the greater MLB career? Adam Jones or Nick Markakis?

Career rWAR: 

-Markakis- 34.4

-Jones- 32.5 

Top 3 Seasons by rWAR:

-Markakis- 1. 7.4 (2008), 2. 4.2 (2007), 3. 2.9 (2009)

-Jones- 1. 4.8 (2013), 2. 4.8 (2014), 3. 4.1 (2012)

Total Games Played:

-Markakis- 2129

-Jones- 1823

Career OPS:

-Markakis- .783

-Jones- .771

Best Single Season OPS:

-Markakis- .897 (2008)

-Jones- .839 (2012)

All Star Selections:

-Jones- 5 (2009, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015) 

-Markakis- 1 (2018)

Gold Gloves:

-Jones- 4

-Markakis- 3

Silver Slugger:

-Jones- 1

-Markakis- 1

 

I think you could still make an argument either way.  Loved em both as players.

 

 

[Frobby]

52 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Since I/we have already derailed this I'll make one more off-topic observation.  In '99 Bichette is credited with being a -34 fielder.  That's the 3rd-worst mark of all time in the bb-ref database*.  In '98 he was -4, in '00 he was -2.  There's two explanations I know of for something like that: 1) He was injured or 2) the metrics conspired to give us an unrealistic picture of his defense.  No healthy player is going to go from basically average to historically bad in one year, and the back again.  It would be like a hitter having an OPS of .850 one year, .512 the next, and .875 the next.  Unless he was hurt it can't be 100% right.

Well, there are some “old school” indicia that he was pretty bad that year.     He made 13 errors for a .951 fielding %.     His range factor was .25 chances/9 lower than the prior season.   He played only LF in 1999, whereas before that he had mixed in a little RF.   But still, I agree that sounds a bit extreme.  

[DrungoHazewood]

13 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I do think you can slump like that in the field but it would take a case of the yips to do it.

Mostly I think fielding metrics are not good and that retroactively grading fielding has little value. 

If you really get the yips they stop playing you.  Knoblauch was -15 in '99, but -10 in 2000 with the yips because they stopped putting him at second. 

Disagree with the second statement, but whatever.

[Frobby]

9 minutes ago, TommyPickles said:

Markakis is pulling ahead in one of the great Orioles debates of the last fifteen years:

Who had the greater MLB career? Adam Jones or Nick Markakis?

Career rWAR: 

-Markakis- 34.4

-Jones- 32.5 

Top 3 Seasons by rWAR:

-Markakis- 1. 7.4 (2008), 2. 4.2 (2007), 3. 2.9 (2009)

-Jones- 1. 4.8 (2013), 2. 4.8 (2014), 3. 4.1 (2012)

Total Games Played:

-Markakis- 2129

-Jones- 1823

Career OPS:

-Markakis- .783

-Jones- .771

Best Single Season OPS:

-Markakis- .897 (2008)

-Jones- .839 (2012)

All Star Selections:

-Jones- 5 (2009, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015) 

-Markakis- 1 (2018)

Gold Gloves:

-Jones- 4

-Markakis- 3

Silver Slugger:

-Jones- 1

-Markakis- 1

 

I think you could still make an argument either way.  Loved em both as players.

 

 

Jones had the better prime, Nick was a solid player for a longer time.   Loved it when they played together, they were like ying and yang.

[TommyPickles]

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Jones had the better prime, Nick was a solid player for a longer time.   Loved it when they played together, they were like ying and yang.

Very true.

The only real exception to this being Markakis' 2008 season, he KILLED it that year.  .897 OPS, .306 AVG, 20 homers, 48 2Bs, 10 SB, 7.4 WAR.

[Frobby]

Just now, TommyPickles said:

Very true.

The only real exception to this being Markakis' 2008 season, he KILLED it that year.  .897 OPS, .306 AVG, 20 homers, 48 2Bs, 10 SB, 7.4 WAR.

Yep, at age 24.    I thought he was going to be a superstar.    Instead he was just a very solid, very consistent, very durable player.   But I’ll take it.  

[TommyPickles]

@Frobby , do you see them both being elected to the Orioles Hall of Fame?

I would hope so, but I don't know quite where the bar is for that.