2006-07 MLB Offseason Thread

[treble 0]

Rumour: Blue Jays offer Vernon Wells a 7 year/$126 million contract.

[CanadianChris 0]

Rumour: Blue Jays offer Vernon Wells a 7 year/$126 million contract.

Uh...

 

HOLY SHIT.

[CanadianChris 0]

OPS is not independent of time. Are you kidding me? A players slugging percentage is going to be alot higher during the juice ball era than a dead ball era. Plus players like Bonds see alot less pitches and walk at a higher frequency due to their power and batters eye. The on base percentage goes up even further. Look at Giambi, his ops is pretty good even though he has become a .250 hitter now. His on base percentage is anywhere from .450 to .500. Manny Ramirez in a down year had an ops of 1.060. This era since 1995 has had a great impact on Numbers.

If you read it carefully, you'd notice that I used OPS+, not OPS.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

OPS is not independent of time. Are you kidding me? A players slugging percentage is going to be alot higher during the juice ball era than a dead ball era. Plus players like Bonds see alot less pitches and walk at a higher frequency due to their power and batters eye. The on base percentage goes up even further. Look at Giambi, his ops is pretty good even though he has become a .250 hitter now. His on base percentage is anywhere from .450 to .500. Manny Ramirez in a down year had an ops of 1.060. This era since 1995 has had a great impact on Numbers.

OPS+ is different. It takes OPS and expresses it as a percentage of the league average.

 

Al, you have averages adjusted for home park. That fails to take into account the other half of their games played. I am sorry but I prefer players who put up dominant numbers during a downtime for runs scored. It is alot more impressive to me to see a player hit 40 homeruns and drive in 120 rbi's in 1978 than a guy who does it in 1999.

 

Bagwell was better at home than on the road, but that's not the point. I think we would both agree that in different contexts, different achievements are similar. A 30 home run season in one era might be just as good as a 40 home run season era in another season. Just as you can't automatically think every player in an offensive era is a great hitter, you can't think that every great hitter in that era was simply a product of their environment.

 

Two things. One, Bagwell was impressive even for his era. His numbers stand above most of his peers, who played under similar conditions. Second, Bagwell's case is not built on home runs and RBIs. Bagwell walked 100+ times a year, hit doubles, and stole over 200 bases. Bagwell contributed in virtually every facit of the game, so while his raw totals in counting stats don't stand out, he truly excelled.

[Guest NYankees]

Yeah and OPS+ is still determined by the era. Look at runs scored per game by teams in the 1970's and 1980's. It goes anywhere from 3.8 runs per game to 4.4 runs per game. Lets say the average is 4.0 runs per game. Since the juiced ball era runs scored per game has been 4.8 to 5 plus runs per game. Over the span of a season a team is averaging anywhere from 100 to 160 more runs per season now than they were in the 1970's. For the number 3 or number 4 hitter that could be anywhere from 15-30 more rbi's over the course of a season. So to me it is more impressive to see Jim Rice drive in 140 rbi's in 1977 than Jeff Bagwell drive in 140 in 1999.

[Guest NYankees]

OPS is not independent of time. Are you kidding me? A players slugging percentage is going to be alot higher during the juice ball era than a dead ball era. Plus players like Bonds see alot less pitches and walk at a higher frequency due to their power and batters eye. The on base percentage goes up even further. Look at Giambi, his ops is pretty good even though he has become a .250 hitter now. His on base percentage is anywhere from .450 to .500. Manny Ramirez in a down year had an ops of 1.060. This era since 1995 has had a great impact on Numbers.

OPS+ is different. It takes OPS and expresses it as a percentage of the league average.

 

Al, you have averages adjusted for home park. That fails to take into account the other half of their games played. I am sorry but I prefer players who put up dominant numbers during a downtime for runs scored. It is alot more impressive to me to see a player hit 40 homeruns and drive in 120 rbi's in 1978 than a guy who does it in 1999.

Bagwell was better at home than on the road, but that's not the point. I think we would both agree that in different contexts, different achievements are similar. A 30 home run season in one era might be just as good as a 40 home run season era in another season. Just as you can't automatically think every player in an offensive era is a great hitter, you can't think that every great hitter in that era was simply a product of their environment.

 

Two things. One, Bagwell was impressive even for his era. His numbers stand above most of his peers, who played under similar conditions. Second, Bagwell's case is not built on home runs and RBIs. Bagwell walked 100+ times a year, hit doubles, and stole over 200 bases. Bagwell contributed in virtually every facit of the game, so while his raw totals in counting stats don't stand out, he truly excelled.

 

You bring up very valid points. To me Bagwell was an A minus player who is on the cusp of being a Hall of Famer. If he gets in great. If the Hall of Fame lets him in, they are going to have to let in others as well. I dont want to see players being discriminated against because of the era that they played in. If Andre Dawson and Jim Rice were to play today they would be locks.

[Guest NYankees]

Rumour: Blue Jays offer Vernon Wells a 7 year/$126 million contract.

 

 

I cannot see him taking the contract. With the way the Yankees and the Red Sox are run and with their payrolls it is really hard to compete in the AL East. If I were him, I would go to the Angels and be playing in the playoffs every year instead of wondering if the Yankees or the Red Sox are going to stumble. Toronto has a good team but I wouldn't want to be on a team that is playing for second or third place every year.

[CanadianChris 0]

RBI is the most overrated offensive statistic there is, aside from batting average. You can't look at RBI when you're making critical comparisons of players, especially those of different eras. I never even look at RBI when comparing players, because it's meaningless to me.

 

OPS+ is not determined by the era, because it's expressed as a percentage of the league average at the time. And it has nothing to do with runs scored or runs driven in. OPS+ tells me that Jeff Bagwell was a better hitter in his era than Jim Rice was in his, because he was higher above the league average.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Yeah and OPS+ is still determined by the era. Look at runs scored per game by teams in the 1970's and 1980's. It goes anywhere from 3.8 runs per game to 4.4 runs per game. Lets say the average is 4.0 runs per game. Since the juiced ball era runs scored per game has been 4.8 to 5 plus runs per game. Over the span of a season a team is averaging anywhere from 100 to 160 more runs per season now than they were in the 1970's. For the number 3 or number 4 hitter that could be anywhere from 15-30 more rbi's over the course of a season. So to me it is more impressive to see Jim Rice drive in 140 rbi's in 1977 than Jeff Bagwell drive in 140 in 1999.

I'm not quite sure you understand the concept. The OPS is computed over the league OPS. So a guy producing the exact same raw OPS would receive a higher OPS+ in Rice's era than he would in Bagwell's era.

 

Jim Rice. His RBI totals are indeed impressive. The problem is that he had three great years and tailed off. That's the real issue with his candidacy, not his peak. And again, there's more to computing statistics than just RBIs.

 

You bring up very valid points. To me Bagwell was an A minus player who is on the cusp of being a Hall of Famer. If he gets in great. If the Hall of Fame lets him in, they are going to have to let in others as well. I dont want to see players being discriminated against because of the era that they played in. If Andre Dawson and Jim Rice were to play today they would be locks.

 

Let me focus on something important here. If you look at baseball in the 1970s/80s, nearly every team played in a park built for baseball/football. Lots of foul territories, deep power alleys, etc. Fenway Park was the exception, a park with a short left field fence and not a lot of space. Guys like Jim Rice teed off that wall. Part of the offensive explosion today is that every park resembles Fenway more than the multi-purpose stadiums. The switch from '70s Fenway to '90s Fenway is not as significant as it would be for any other team. After all, the Red Sox scored more runs in 1977 than they did this year! That's due in many ways to personnel, but it illustrates a point.

[CanadianChris 0]

Rumour: Blue Jays offer Vernon Wells a 7 year/$126 million contract.

 

 

I cannot see him taking the contract. With the way the Yankees and the Red Sox are run and with their payrolls it is really hard to compete in the AL East. If I were him, I would go to the Angels and be playing in the playoffs every year instead of wondering if the Yankees or the Red Sox are going to stumble. Toronto has a good team but I wouldn't want to be on a team that is playing for second or third place every year.

Oh, come on. Athletes follow the money. That would be the sixth-largest contract in baseball, and he's guaranteed to get paid until he turns 34.

 

Plus, it's not a foregone conclusion the Yankees and Sox will be on top of the division for the next seven years, nor that the Angels will be on top of theirs. I'm sure Yankee fans thought the team was invincible coming out of the 70s, and look how that turned out.

[Guest NYankees]

I was saying it would be tough for the Blue Jays to make the playoffs due to the fact that you have two well run organizations and the top two payrolls in baseball. I also said if I were him I would to and play for the Angels because he would probably make the playoffs 4 times at least out of 7 with them. I wouldn't want to be with a team playing for 2nd and 3rd place every year. The Yankees have made the playoffs every year since 1995 and the Red Sox have made it 6 times. The Blue Jays nead the perfect season to be able to jump over both of the two teams and even if they jump over one team like last year they still need to be able to win 95 plus games to win the wild card. The Angels would be a perfect fit for him.

 

And if he can get 126 million from the Blue Jays just imagine how much he can get on the open market.

[CanadianChris 0]

It won't be much more than 126 million, unless some team is willing to tack some extra years on. I doubt Wells will become the fifth $20-million man in baseball.

[Precious Roy 0]

http://asher.baseballevolution.com/bagwellconspiracy.html

[Mik 0]

If that was supposed to be serious I'm a million times dumber for having read half of it.

 

And NYankees got pwned into oblivion with the OPS+ debate.

[Guest Smues]

Joel Piniero is a free agent. Maybe the Royals will give him an insane deal too so he can pitch alongside Meche again.

[Vern Gagne 0]

It would be nice to Bagwell and Biggio go into the Hall of Fame the same year.

[vivalaultra 0]

That's probably what'll happen if Biggio retires after 07 after he gets 3000 hits and Bagwell gets in in his 2nd year of eligibility.

[Vern Gagne 0]

I might go if that happens.

[Vern Gagne 0]

I might go if that happens.

[Conspiracy_Victim 0]

http://asher.baseballevolution.com/bagwellconspiracy.html

 

What I've just read is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever seem. At no point in his rambling, incoherent response was he even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this board is now dumber for having seen it. I award him no points, and may God have mercy on his soul.

 

Seriously, claiming that Jeff Bagwell is the kingpin of the entire major league baseball steroid problem based on pixie dust and conjecture? I'm praying that the guy is joking, because if he isn't he oughta be in a padded cell with a nice tight white jacket on.

 

And NYankee go ahead and just say you don't think Bagwell should get in because he's an Astro. Go ahead and say it. You've come up with every other excuse under the sun and been statistically rebuffed, so this is about all you've got left.

[Guest NYankees]

I have been statistically rebuffed? I was saying that if you let in Bagwell, you are going to have to let in some stars from the 70's and 80's who put up just as good numbers as Bagwell and played during a PITCHERS ERA AND NOT A JUICED BALL ERA. I could care less if he was an Astro or a Killer Bee. And we all know he was a choke artist in the playoffs who never came up big. .220 Ba 2 homeruns 13 rbi's in 40 playoff games. Why would I hate on him for being an Astro when I am make arguments for a Red Sox and an Expo? And the article was Idiotic? Were you not able to tell that the article was filled with something call Sarcasm?

[the pinjockey 0]

Again though, the era is taken into account with OPS+ by comparing it to the league + park factors for that season.

 

If the average OPS in Rice's era was .800, his OPS would be factored by that + park factors.

If the average OPS in Bagwell's era was .850, his OPS would be factored by that + park factors. So the extra league wide offense is entered into the equation.

 

And holding a 100 ab sample over a 7800 ab career is just silly. Of course it is very sportswriterish, which has me a little worried when his vote comes around.

[v.2 0]

I have been statistically rebuffed? I was saying that if you let in Bagwell, you are going to have to let in some stars from the 70's and 80's who put up just as good numbers as Biggio and played during a PITCHERS ERA AND NOT A JUICED BALL ERA. I could care less if he was an Astro or a Killer Bee. And we all know he was a choke artist in the playoffs who never came up big. .220 Ba 2 homeruns 13 rbi's in 40 playoff games. Why would I hate on him for being an Astro when I am make arguments for a Red Sox and an Expo? And the article was Idiotic? Were you not able to tell that the article was filled with something call Sarcasm?

 

Just as good as Biggio?

[Annabelle 0]

Rumour: Blue Jays offer Vernon Wells a 7 year/$126 million contract.

 

 

I cannot see him taking the contract. With the way the Yankees and the Red Sox are run and with their payrolls it is really hard to compete in the AL East. If I were him, I would go to the Angels and be playing in the playoffs every year instead of wondering if the Yankees or the Red Sox are going to stumble. Toronto has a good team but I wouldn't want to be on a team that is playing for second or third place every year.

 

are you kidding? he'd take that, no sweat. even though it would be DUMB of the blue jays to offer.

[Guest NYankees]

I have a question. If Jim Rice or Andre Dawson had played during this era and based on their production from when they played, how many more homeruns, doubles would they hit during this era? If they would have hit more homeruns and doubles, that would have increased their slugging and players with a high slugging percentage tend to be pitched around and walked alot as well. That would have increased their on base percantage. Dawson, Rice and other players shouldn't be discriminated against based on the era that they played in. During the Juiced Ball era, players like Brady Anderson hit 52 homeruns and Kevin Elster hit 30 homeruns. Those kind of feats make players like Dawson and Rice accomplishments seem alot less impressive in the baseball writers (who vote) eyes.

[the pinjockey 0]

And one time in the 70s Davey Johnson hit 43 HRs. Taking one season of a player's career reads more fluke than anything else. And looking at Elster's stats he only hit 24, and it was a season towards the end of the prime age range (age 31 season) when he managed to get to over 500 ABs (which he didn't in any other year). I think that had just as much to do with his season.

 

I don't know enough about the conversion equations to get into doubles conversions and all that, but for comparisons sake Moises Alou is currently the 30th active highest OPS+ with a 128 (same as Rice).

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I have a question. If Jim Rice or Andre Dawson had played during this era and based on their production from when they played, how many more homeruns, doubles would they hit during this era? If they would have hit more homeruns and doubles, that would have increased their slugging and players with a high slugging percentage tend to be pitched around and walked alot as well. That would have increased their on base percantage. Dawson, Rice and other players shouldn't be discriminated against based on the era that they played in. During the Juiced Ball era, players like Brady Anderson hit 52 homeruns and Kevin Elster hit 30 homeruns. Those kind of feats make players like Dawson and Rice accomplishments seem alot less impressive in the baseball writers (who vote) eyes.

Take these with a grain of salt. Baseball Prospectus translates numbers, and estimates that in today's environment, Rice would hit 488 home runs and 1,524 RBIs. Dawson jumps to 616 home runs, a number I find frankly preposterous (and I said I would vote for Dawson in the HOF thread). Bagwell's given 511 home runs in his own right when they adjust his numbers. Baseball Prospectus's numbers in this regard are heavily inflated, and I find it hard to figure out what to make of them.

 

Andre Dawson isn't discriminated against because of his era. He's discriminated against because of the players who accumulated 3000+ plate appearances from 1976-96, Dawson ranks 271st in On Base Percentage. Rice is kept out because his numbers are borderline, and that's not counting that he played in a ballpark that inflated offense to the same level that Arlington does today. I can't emphasize that enough. Yes, Rice hit for a lot of power. He also wasn't a good fielder, basestealer, grounded into more double plays than any player in history, and the left field wall stood 310 ft. away. Rice is a player who looks superficially impressive, but less so when you dig into the numbers. Bagwell is the opposite.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

And for the heck of it, the Keltner List...

 

I figured this was worth running. This is one of those instances where a computerized baseball encyclopedia really comes in handy.

 

1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?

 

Doubtful, unless you count Bagwell's 1994 MVP. Barry Bonds was widely considered the best baseball player during the 1990s, along with Ken Griffey Jr. Bagwell's MVP is dubious since it occured in a strike-shortened season, making rate stats look more impressive than usual.

 

2. Was he the best player on his team?

 

Yes. Craig Biggio comes awfully close, but Bagwell beats him in RCAP (Runs Created Over Position) over the stretch of their tenures.

 

3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?

 

Bagwell was the best first baseman in the National League in the 1990s, and it is not close. Bagwell had the highest OBP, Slugging Percentage, OPS, Offensive Winning Percentage, and created the most runs per game. In the entirety of baseball, Frank Thomas and Mark McGwire were more impressive on a per/game basis, but both played less games.

 

4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?

 

Yes. Bagwell played every game of the season for the '97 Astros, slugging .612 in September. The Astros won by 12 games in 1998. The 'Stros won their division by just 1.5 games in 1999. Bagwell hit 42 home runs and stole 30 bases for that club. The Astros won via tiebreaker in 2001 and Bagwell again slugged .612 in September. The Astros won the wild card in 2004 with Bagwell on the decline, but he still hit 27 home runs. So yes, Bagwell played a meaningful role on at least four playoff teams.

 

5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?

 

Yes, up to the point where injuries curtailed his career. With his shoulder injury limiting his production, Bagwell missed eight games total over two years from 2003-04.

 

6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?

 

If he were eligible and not in, he would have 388 win shares, more than any player not currently eligible and inducted. Tim Raines might take the honor

if not elected next year.

 

7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?

 

Bagwell's comp list includes five players not yet eligible for the Hall of Fame, and five Hall of Famers. The Hall of Famers are Willie Stargell, Orlando Cepeda, Mickey Mantle, Willie McCovey and Duke Snider. Of the five not yet eligible, three are likely to make the Hall, one is borderline (Gary Sheffield, due to PED rumors) and the other is Andres Galarraga.

 

8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?

 

Black Ink: Batting - 24 (78) (Average HOFer ≈ 27)

Gray Ink: Batting - 157 (75) (Average HOFer ≈ 144)

HOF Standards: Batting - 59.0 (31) (Average HOFer ≈ 50)

HOF Monitor: Batting - 149.5 (78) (Likely HOFer > 100)

 

Yes.

 

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

 

His raw statistics are adversely effected compared to others in his era due to having played his prime in the Astrodome, an extreme pitchers' park.

 

10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?

 

Yes.

 

11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?

 

Bagwell won the MVP once, finished in the top five three times, and in the top ten six times.

 

12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?

 

Bagwell played in just four All-Star games. One would assume that once the McGwire explosion hit, McGwire received all the All-Star nods.

 

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?

 

Yes.

 

14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?

 

None that we know of.

 

15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?

 

There are PED rumors but no substantial evidence, either tangible or circumstantial. Bagwell usually carried himself with class and dignity.

[Guest NYankees]

The rumor is that the cheapskate Red Sox are offering D Mat a 6 year 48 million dollar contract. They are not operating in good faith and the posting should be voided.

 

Max Kellerman is bringing up a very good question. Does Roger Clemens keep on pitching until he breaks Warren Spahns modern record for win total? Spahn has 363 career victories and Roger is currently at 348.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

The rumor is that the cheapskate Red Sox are offering D Mat a 6 year 48 million dollar contract. They are not operating in good faith and the posting should be voided.

 

That would bring their total financial commitment to $100 million over 6 years for a guy who has never thrown a pitch in Major League Baseball. What a bunch of cheapskates!

 

Scott Boras' counter offer was supposedly $66 million over 6 years. Both sides need to swallow their pride and settle on something in the middle. How about $60 million over 6 years? Seems stupid to let it die over what would be $2-3 million a year. That's a drop in the bucket for this team.