Posts: 61
Threads: 2
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation:
0
I believe in the body of work, not just cherry-picking stats. If HOF voters only looked at one or two stats, Blyleven would've been in years ago because of all the strikeouts and Maris would be immortalized in bronze decades ago.
Comparing Pujols to McGwire is somewhat disingenuous because Pujols is far more well-rounded. He's a legit GG-caliber first baseman and led his team in steals last year, not to mention the the batting average that like a hundred points higher.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=80237:date=Feb 21 2010, 08:23 PM:name=Dave)-->QUOTE (Dave @ Feb 21 2010, 08:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I believe in the body of work, not just cherry-picking stats. If HOF voters only looked at one or two stats, Blyleven would've been in years ago because of all the strikeouts and Maris would be immortalized in bronze decades ago.
Comparing Pujols to McGwire is somewhat disingenuous because Pujols is far more well-rounded. He's a legit GG-caliber first baseman and led his team in steals last year, not to mention the the batting average that like a hundred points higher.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nobody is cherry-picking stats. On-base percentage is considered the single most important stat, correct? McGwire was <i>really </i>good at it. His career OBP is higher than Rod Carew, Honus Wagner, A-Rod, and Tony Gwynn, among others. That's pretty freaking good, no matter how you look at it.
He also won a Gold Glove in the field, so he while he wasn't as slick as Pujols in the field, he wasn't a butcher either.
Again, I can't believe I'm defending the hated jackass that is Mark McGwire. But if one day, we start letting roid users into the Hall, McGwire will certainly get in. And I hope Sammy will too, although his case is slightly less convincing.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->On-base percentage is considered the single most important stat, correct?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, there's no stat considered that.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=80243:date=Feb 21 2010, 09:10 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Feb 21 2010, 09:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->On-base percentage is considered the single most important stat, correct?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, there's no stat considered that.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fair enough. But what is one that is considered <i>more</i> important?
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=80245:date=Feb 21 2010, 09:15 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 21 2010, 09:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=80243:date=Feb 21 2010, 09:10 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Feb 21 2010, 09:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->On-base percentage is considered the single most important stat, correct?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, there's no stat considered that.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fair enough. But what is one that is considered <i>more</i> important?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Depends on what you're comparing.
Posts: 61
Threads: 2
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation:
0
Fred McGriff has a higher OPS+ than Sosa, does that make the Crime Dog more HOF-worthy than Sosa?
Runs created (after all, you dont win a baseball game without scoring a run or two)
Sosa 1625
McGwire 1529
And yes, I do believe that Sammy being considered one of the 10 best players in his league more time than McGwire means something.
Posts: 5,185
Threads: 174
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=80264:date=Feb 21 2010, 11:22 PM:name=Dave)-->QUOTE (Dave @ Feb 21 2010, 11:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Fred McGriff has a higher OPS+ than Sosa, does that make the Crime Dog more HOF-worthy than Sosa?
Runs created (after all, you dont win a baseball game without scoring a run or two)
Sosa 1625
McGwire 1529
And yes, I do believe that Sammy being considered one of the 10 best players in his league more time than McGwire means something.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Taking top 10 is totally arbitrary. They track MVP up to top 25. McGwire made that list 11 times, compared to 9 for Sosa. McGwire made 12 all star teams, Sosa made 7.
I don't know who was better between them, but it doesn't matter. They're both cheaters and both deserve to never make the HOF.
This is not some silly theory that's unsupported and deserves being mocked by photos of Xena. ![[Image: ITgoyeg.png]](http://i.imgur.com/ITgoyeg.png)
Posts: 61
Threads: 2
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation:
0
McGwire also has a lead in Win Shares (342-325 I believe, I'd have to double check Sammy's) but I just dont see how a guy with under 1700 hits in his career can be considered among the best ever, I just cannot subscribe to the theory that home runs are the most important thing in the game.
Posts: 2,911
Threads: 67
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=80265:date=Feb 21 2010, 11:36 PM:name=Kid)-->QUOTE (Kid @ Feb 21 2010, 11:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I don't know who was better between them, but it doesn't matter. They're both cheaters and both deserve to never make the HOF.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This.
And Dave, if you include McGwire's BBs, he reached base 2,943 times. Sosa reached base 3,337, but has a longer career since he didn't attend college or play in the Olympics (and remained healthy).
Posts: 1,720
Threads: 41
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=80233:date=Feb 21 2010, 08:16 PM:name=jstraw)-->QUOTE (jstraw @ Feb 21 2010, 08:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=80231:date=Feb 21 2010, 08:08 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 21 2010, 08:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=80167:date=Feb 20 2010, 03:02 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Feb 20 2010, 03:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=80164:date=Feb 20 2010, 02:08 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 20 2010, 02:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I love Sammy Sosa. And I dislike Mark McGwire.
Just like I love Derek Lee and dislike Albert Pujols.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How are Derek Lee and Albert Pujols analogous?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Derek Lee's career OPS+ is 124, which is very close to Sammy's 128.
Albert Pujols's career OPS+ is 172, which is relatively close to McGwire's 162.
So, as a hitter, McGwire is much closer to Pujols than he is to Sosa.
As I've stated, I don't like McGwire. I love Sammy. But saying he was a better player is analogous to saying that Lee is better than Pujols. Yes, I wish it were true. But we all know it isn't.
Critics of McGwire say "He could only do two things!"
That may be true, but those two things were getting on base at a phenomenal clip, and hitting home runs at a higher rate than anyone in the history of the sport.
If a hitter were to only do 2 things well,<i> those</i> would be the two things you'd most want.
Hey, this is a Cub's board. I understand the Cub love. In contrast, the Cards are our hated rivals. And as I've stated, Derrek Lee and Sammy Sosa are two of my favorite players of my lifetime.
But reality is reality. Those Cardinal players, in addition to being shitheads, were certainly great players. That's all I'm saying.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Personally, I'm resigned to the possibility of never knowing if Lee is better than Pujols. Lee isn't juicing and I believe Pujols is.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What has happened at any point in Pujols career to make you think he is juicing? Seriously, I understand that he is a Cardinal and we all hate him....but do you logically believe that he has been juicing all of these years without getting caught?
Sure, he may have juiced in the minors and got away with it, but that was also the same time that McGwire, Bonds, and countless others were juicing. To seriously believe that Pujols is still juicing is just plain stupid, there is NO logical reasoning behind it. There has never been any proof, he wasn't in the Mitchell report and you never even hear anyone (outside of Cub fans) even question him.
Being Cub fans, it hurts to say that the best baseball player in all of baseball plays for our hated rivals, but that is what it is, he is a freak of nature with a gift that can't be matched by anyone else in the league and we have to deal with that.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
They don't test for HGH, if there's no paper trail, you can still be doing it now and be just fine.
Also, Pujols went from playing at a no name JC, got drafted in the middle rounds, then spent one year in the minors before hitting 30 HR and having 100 RBI for 9 straight seasons on the MLB level. That is not a normal progression, it throws up red flags all over the place. Pujols is using PEDs.
Posts: 8,024
Threads: 100
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=80324:date=Feb 22 2010, 11:00 AM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Feb 22 2010, 11:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->They don't test for HGH, if there's no paper trail, you can still be doing it now and be just fine.
Also, Pujols went from playing at a no name JC, got drafted in the middle rounds, then spent one year in the minors before hitting 30 HR and having 100 RBI for 9 straight seasons on the MLB level. That is not a normal progression, it throws up red flags all over the place. Pujols is using PEDs.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The photographic evidence is similar to that of Bonds as well. He has bulked up tremendously over the span of a few years.
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=80324:date=Feb 22 2010, 01:00 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Feb 22 2010, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->They don't test for HGH, if there's no paper trail, you can still be doing it now and be just fine.
Also, Pujols went from playing at a no name JC, got drafted in the middle rounds, then spent one year in the minors before hitting 30 HR and having 100 RBI for 9 straight seasons on the MLB level. That is not a normal progression, it throws up red flags all over the place. Pujols is using PEDs.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't have a problem with you claiming Pujols is taking PEDs, but I do have to interject when you mention HGH. It's very controversial if HGH helps athletes and all studies involving HGH supplementation and athletic performance shows that HGH has no benefit. The only thing it has been shown to benefit is increased recovery from injury and injury prevention.
Posts: 1,720
Threads: 41
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I am not trying to be a Pujols apologist or anything, but I looked a 2001 rookie picture of him and then a picture from last year....he isn't that much bigger than he was in 2001.
Posts: 11,802
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=80330:date=Feb 22 2010, 11:38 AM:name=Runnys)-->QUOTE (Runnys @ Feb 22 2010, 11:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I am not trying to be a Pujols apologist or anything, but I looked a 2001 rookie picture of him and then a picture from last year....he isn't that much bigger than he was in 2001.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He started juicing before his rookie year.
|
