Home Sports Talk

Ted Williams is no longer a triple crown winner.

craig44craig44 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited June 7, 2024 6:22AM in Sports Talk

With the inclusion of the Negro League stats into MLB's record book, Teddy ballgame has lost his 2 triple crowns. He no longer is the BA leader for either 1942 or 1947.

on a side note, the Iron Horse also has lost his triple crown from 1934 as he is also no longer the BA leader for that season.

George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.

«1

Comments

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,541 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Let them destroy the history of the game.

    Hopefully everyone stops going to games and MLB suffers catastrophic money loss

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I sure hope they do that, have separate lists. I have noticed on basketball reference that they have separate lists for NBA, ABA and then they have a combined list.

    George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,920 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited June 4, 2024 6:05AM

    Williams would still be considered the triple crown winner in this instance. It wouldn't be any different than Miguel Cabrera winning the triple crown in 2012 despite having a lower batting average than Buster Posey who played in the NL.

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,874 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I just read where the NFL is now involved again in some BS. Fortunately I think it's eleven teams are refusing to partake in it, including the Chiefs and Cowboys, and I applaud them for that.

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭✭✭

    How is Buddy Burbage not in the HOF?

    But, when I look up the TC winners on BBREF, I see Lou Gehrig in 1934 AL and I see Ted Williams for 42 & 47 AL. There are some NNL and NN2 league winners, but they seem partitioned as you might expect based on the different leagues they played in.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @bgr said:
    How is Buddy Burbage not in the HOF?

    But, when I look up the TC winners on BBREF, I see Lou Gehrig in 1934 AL and I see Ted Williams for 42 & 47 AL. There are some NNL and NN2 league winners, but they seem partitioned as you might expect based on the different leagues they played in.

    they are partitioned, but other single season records are not, like all time single season SLG and BA.

    see how the waters have been muddied?

    George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.

  • MistlinMistlin Posts: 323 ✭✭✭

    The question I would pose:

    Why do you care?

    Does something happening in 2024 take away from the greatness that was Williams' career? Will you view his accomplishments any differently today than before the integration of the record books?

    Or are you allowing yourselves to get swept up in a culture war that has no bearing on your view of MLB history?

    I do not have time for ignorant trolls.
    ignore list: 1948_Swell_Robinson, Darin, bgr, bronco2078, dallasactuary

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭✭

    They can say whatever they want. He still is the triple crown winner.

    Missouri 14 OSU 3

  • GroceryRackPackGroceryRackPack Posts: 3,116 ✭✭✭✭✭

    and people wonder why I don't do baseball... :(

  • GroceryRackPackGroceryRackPack Posts: 3,116 ✭✭✭✭✭

  • burghmanburghman Posts: 924 ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 4, 2024 2:28PM

    Wasn’t he the AL Triple Crown winner? Why does someone in a different league take away the fact that he led the AL in those categories? Someone can win the AL Triple Crown but be way behind the leaders in the NL. I understand some of the angst about career stats (understand but don’t necessarily agree with it), but it doesn’t change anything related to specific AL or NL records.

    Jim

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭✭✭

    But do you know who his jockey was? No cheating!

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭✭

    @burghman said:
    Wasn’t he the AL Triple Crown winner? Why does someone in a different league take away the fact that he led the AL in those categories? Someone can win the AL Triple Crown but be way behind the leaders in the NL. I understand some of the angst about career stats (understand but don’t necessarily agree with it), but it doesn’t change anything related to specific AL or NL records.

    Whats the difference though for another league having their stats added? Should they be added to the AL or NL? Strong played for the KC Monarchs and KC is an AL team. They also played less than 40 games in 1942 but is now recorded as the highest average that year. Same thing with Serreall even though Williams lead all of MLB in average homeruns and RBIs

    Missouri 14 OSU 3

  • burghmanburghman Posts: 924 ✭✭✭✭

    Wait, so because Josh Gibson played for 2 teams in Pittsburgh, you’re suggesting that his stats should be NL stats because the Pirates are in the NL? Wow, that’s a leap that I didn’t see even you making.

    The Negro League stats aren’t added to the NL or the AL. They’re added to the set of MLB stats because they’ve made the decision that the Negro Leagues were a “Major” league (at least that’s how I see it - not sure they’ve ever said that, so it’s my interpretation). The MLB “entity” is saying that it’s no longer just the NL and the AL (and the half dozen late 1800s and early 1900s non-AL/NL leagues that were previously added to the “Major” league record books in 1969).

    People are welcome to slice and dice as they see fit. Hockey fans can similarly scour NHL, WHA, KHL, etc. and do what they want. Football fans can combine NFL, CFL, WLAF, USFL, XFL, yada yada yada and have a party. People can do what they want with stats - it doesn’t change anything that anyone’s heroes have done.

    Jim

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Yes. That’s what I would have said if I could speak eloquently.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭✭

    @burghman said:
    Wait, so because Josh Gibson played for 2 teams in Pittsburgh, you’re suggesting that his stats should be NL stats because the Pirates are in the NL? Wow, that’s a leap that I didn’t see even you making.

    The Negro League stats aren’t added to the NL or the AL. They’re added to the set of MLB stats because they’ve made the decision that the Negro Leagues were a “Major” league (at least that’s how I see it - not sure they’ve ever said that, so it’s my interpretation). The MLB “entity” is saying that it’s no longer just the NL and the AL (and the half dozen late 1800s and early 1900s non-AL/NL leagues that were previously added to the “Major” league record books in 1969).

    People are welcome to slice and dice as they see fit. Hockey fans can similarly scour NHL, WHA, KHL, etc. and do what they want. Football fans can combine NFL, CFL, WLAF, USFL, XFL, yada yada yada and have a party. People can do what they want with stats - it doesn’t change anything that anyone’s heroes have done.

    You do become ineligible for awards by switching from the AL to the NL depending when you were traded/signed and it makes it much harder no matter what.

    The league leaders for average now in 1942 played less than 35 games each. If MLB wants to include stats from all "major leagues" than Japan has to be included, Mexico has to be included, the winter leagues have to be included if 35 games is enough. Theres no argument against including those leagues if its supposed to just be baseball records in general. The argument has always been its not the MLB and its a lower level of competition (which it is) which also applies to the Negro Leagues.

    Missouri 14 OSU 3

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭✭✭

    But in 2020 MLB decided that there was enough evidence to support the thesis that the NN2 and MLB were close in skill given the performance of former NN2 players in MLB. That’s why MLB decided to include the NN2 and NNL leagues in MLB. They haven’t decided that for other leagues but if you think there is merit you might petition them.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @burghman said:
    Wasn’t he the AL Triple Crown winner? Why does someone in a different league take away the fact that he led the AL in those categories? Someone can win the AL Triple Crown but be way behind the leaders in the NL. I understand some of the angst about career stats (understand but don’t necessarily agree with it), but it doesn’t change anything related to specific AL or NL records.

    well, as far as I know, Tetelo Vargas and Josh Gibson were not playing in the National League, but they have both surpassed Rogers Hornsby as the single season Batting Average Leaders.

    George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 said:

    @burghman said:
    Wasn’t he the AL Triple Crown winner? Why does someone in a different league take away the fact that he led the AL in those categories? Someone can win the AL Triple Crown but be way behind the leaders in the NL. I understand some of the angst about career stats (understand but don’t necessarily agree with it), but it doesn’t change anything related to specific AL or NL records.

    Whats the difference though for another league having their stats added? Should they be added to the AL or NL? Strong played for the KC Monarchs and KC is an AL team. They also played less than 40 games in 1942 but is now recorded as the highest average that year. Same thing with Serreall even though Williams lead all of MLB in average homeruns and RBIs

    that will be the logical next step, adding in the Negro League teams that played in a MLB city into that teams stat leader boards.

    George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 said:

    @burghman said:
    Wait, so because Josh Gibson played for 2 teams in Pittsburgh, you’re suggesting that his stats should be NL stats because the Pirates are in the NL? Wow, that’s a leap that I didn’t see even you making.

    The Negro League stats aren’t added to the NL or the AL. They’re added to the set of MLB stats because they’ve made the decision that the Negro Leagues were a “Major” league (at least that’s how I see it - not sure they’ve ever said that, so it’s my interpretation). The MLB “entity” is saying that it’s no longer just the NL and the AL (and the half dozen late 1800s and early 1900s non-AL/NL leagues that were previously added to the “Major” league record books in 1969).

    People are welcome to slice and dice as they see fit. Hockey fans can similarly scour NHL, WHA, KHL, etc. and do what they want. Football fans can combine NFL, CFL, WLAF, USFL, XFL, yada yada yada and have a party. People can do what they want with stats - it doesn’t change anything that anyone’s heroes have done.

    You do become ineligible for awards by switching from the AL to the NL depending when you were traded/signed and it makes it much harder no matter what.

    The league leaders for average now in 1942 played less than 35 games each. If MLB wants to include stats from all "major leagues" than Japan has to be included, Mexico has to be included, the winter leagues have to be included if 35 games is enough. Theres no argument against including those leagues if its supposed to just be baseball records in general. The argument has always been its not the MLB and its a lower level of competition (which it is) which also applies to the Negro Leagues.

    There is lots of historical precedence for teams changing leagues (Astros, Brewers) and teams changing cities (senators, expos) there is no reason at all that the KC Negro League team could not be lumped in with the MLB team for example.

    check out the texas rangers all time leaderboards. you know who is the leader on almost every pitcher stat? Walter Johnson. take a guess on how many games he played either for the rangers or in the state of texas...

    mark my words, those stats will integrate into AL/NL leaderboards and are here to stay. history has been altered.

    George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,874 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @bgr said:
    But in 2020 MLB decided that there was enough evidence to support the thesis that the NN2 and MLB were close in skill given the performance of former NN2 players in MLB. That’s why MLB decided to include the NN2 and NNL leagues in MLB. They haven’t decided that for other leagues but if you think there is merit you might petition them.

    https://sabr.org/bioproj/topic/baseball-demographics-1947-2016/

    By 1952 for example sake, most if not all of the Negro Leagues were closed, out of business, from what I've read. So that was 5 years after Jackie Robinson entered the league. Which was more than ample time for the Negro League players to assimilate into the major leagues, if they were good enough.

    The fact that by 1952, MLB was still less than 3% black players, tells me that the statement, "But in 2020 MLB decided that there was enough evidence to support the thesis that the NN2 and MLB were close in skill given the performance of former NN2 players in MLB", is pure and simple revisionist history.

    The Negro Leagues based on the facts, were probably equivalent to MLB minor league teams if that, which had a few major league caliber players on the teams.

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It’s not revisionist history. That’s what they did. You don’t agree with their decision. I think it’s not a big deal once they adjust the thresholds of measure for records.

    Revisionist history would see to say something more profound about the reasoning or merit of the decision.

    I can’t find the list right away but I remember that C.C. Sabathia was on it. I don’t know anything about what credentials would be required to make the assessment they did. In theory though data science tells us that if we have around 5% of samples that we have reached what is called statistical significance. From there we can extrapolate what we need to determine whether inclusion is meritous or not. I haven’t done this myself so I don’t know what the answer is. I just know that the decision was made by MLB and the committee MLB setup to determine worthiness determined as much.

    If you want to go get this undone good luck. I really don’t care either way.

    I don’t even know what’s going on with the ozone layer. Do we even have frogs anymore with all the deet? How many forever chemicals are inside me? Where is the beef? Really.

    My bucket is full of worry.

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,874 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @bgr said:
    It’s not revisionist history.

    >
    Well it could be called much worse than that. Such as a flat out lie. I was trying to be nice. 😉

    Even by 1962, ten years after the example, MLB was only 10% black. So this is indisputable proof that the Negro Leagues were not even close to the caliber of MLB, and it's no longer debatable.

    Case closed.

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    @bgr said:
    It’s not revisionist history.

    >
    Well it could be called much worse than that. Such as a flat out lie. I was trying to be nice. 😉

    Even by 1962, ten years after the example, MLB was only 10% black. So this is indisputable proof that the Negro Leagues were not even close to the caliber of MLB, and it's no longer debatable.

    Case closed.

    Well, if you had to describe factually what happened from the decision in 2020 until today how would you describe it to an alien lacking all other context?

    I don’t want to be revisionist or worse!

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,874 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @bgr said:

    @stevek said:

    @bgr said:
    It’s not revisionist history.

    >
    Well it could be called much worse than that. Such as a flat out lie. I was trying to be nice. 😉

    Even by 1962, ten years after the example, MLB was only 10% black. So this is indisputable proof that the Negro Leagues were not even close to the caliber of MLB, and it's no longer debatable.

    Case closed.

    Well, if you had to describe factually what happened from the decision in 2020 until today how would you describe it to an alien lacking all other context?

    I don’t want to be revisionist or worse!

    I'd get an English to Alien translation for the word "stupid". They probably have stupid aliens on their planet, so they'll understand. 😉

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Well - this is an exercise to compartmentalize emotion and information, but it's not for everyone.

    Here's an article on the 2020 decision.

    https://www.mlb.com/news/negro-leagues-given-major-league-status-for-baseball-records-stats

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭✭

    @craig44 said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @burghman said:
    Wait, so because Josh Gibson played for 2 teams in Pittsburgh, you’re suggesting that his stats should be NL stats because the Pirates are in the NL? Wow, that’s a leap that I didn’t see even you making.

    The Negro League stats aren’t added to the NL or the AL. They’re added to the set of MLB stats because they’ve made the decision that the Negro Leagues were a “Major” league (at least that’s how I see it - not sure they’ve ever said that, so it’s my interpretation). The MLB “entity” is saying that it’s no longer just the NL and the AL (and the half dozen late 1800s and early 1900s non-AL/NL leagues that were previously added to the “Major” league record books in 1969).

    People are welcome to slice and dice as they see fit. Hockey fans can similarly scour NHL, WHA, KHL, etc. and do what they want. Football fans can combine NFL, CFL, WLAF, USFL, XFL, yada yada yada and have a party. People can do what they want with stats - it doesn’t change anything that anyone’s heroes have done.

    You do become ineligible for awards by switching from the AL to the NL depending when you were traded/signed and it makes it much harder no matter what.

    The league leaders for average now in 1942 played less than 35 games each. If MLB wants to include stats from all "major leagues" than Japan has to be included, Mexico has to be included, the winter leagues have to be included if 35 games is enough. Theres no argument against including those leagues if its supposed to just be baseball records in general. The argument has always been its not the MLB and its a lower level of competition (which it is) which also applies to the Negro Leagues.

    There is lots of historical precedence for teams changing leagues (Astros, Brewers) and teams changing cities (senators, expos) there is no reason at all that the KC Negro League team could not be lumped in with the MLB team for example.

    check out the texas rangers all time leaderboards. you know who is the leader on almost every pitcher stat? Walter Johnson. take a guess on how many games he played either for the rangers or in the state of texas...

    mark my words, those stats will integrate into AL/NL leaderboards and are here to stay. history has been altered.

    I was referring more to like the AL NL or vice versa midseason trade where a players stats get eliminated in terms of awards.

    Unfortunately though I do think you are right and with the way basebal l is heading with these decisions that it couuld be entirely possible. I completely disagree with the decision and think its just silly to have batting leaders that played under 35 games in a different league as the most egregious example.

    If this is what baseball wants than I will recognize the Japanese and Mexican league stats as well. Congrats to Ichiro for being the new all time hit leader and OH for being the new homerun leader. Cant have it both ways, either only MLB stats count or everyones count

    Missouri 14 OSU 3

  • MCMLVToppsMCMLVTopps Posts: 4,830 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Teddy Ballgame will always be the triple crown winner in my book.

    What he sacrificed for this country during the height of his career is immeasurable. I was very fortunate to see him play in Fenway, long ago and far away.

    I agree with Basebal21, either they all count or just the MLB. They do call it the WORLD SERIES

  • pocketpiececommemspocketpiececommems Posts: 5,850 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Whats the difference though for another league having their stats added? Should they be added to the AL or NL? Strong played for the KC Monarchs and KC is an AL team. They also played less than 40 games in 1942 but is now recorded as the highest average that year. Same thing with Serreall even though Williams lead all of MLB in average homeruns and RBIs

    If a player is going to be allowed to play 40 games less than the rest of the league then the league leaders for the years they are not leaders anymore should be allowed to remove 40 games of their choice to see if they are back to being the leader. 🤔

  • MistlinMistlin Posts: 323 ✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    @bgr said:
    It’s not revisionist history.

    >
    Well it could be called much worse than that. Such as a flat out lie. I was trying to be nice. 😉

    Even by 1962, ten years after the example, MLB was only 10% black. So this is indisputable proof that the Negro Leagues were not even close to the caliber of MLB, and it's no longer debatable.

    Case closed.

    (a) What percentage would you have accepted as proof?
    (b) it's not 'indisputable'
    (c) 'Case closed'? You're right. The Negro Leagues are considered a 'Major League' by the only people who have a say - no matter how many times you claim to the contrary.

    I do not have time for ignorant trolls.
    ignore list: 1948_Swell_Robinson, Darin, bgr, bronco2078, dallasactuary

  • MistlinMistlin Posts: 323 ✭✭✭

    Why people continue to argue against something that people who have spent literally YEARS researching is not all that surprising. This is the same country which people believe in 'alternative facts' and who watch YouTube videos and believe they are more knowledgeable than people whose careers are spent in the field.

    The facts remain: MLB has ruled Negro League players are, in fact, considered Major League players, their statistics (again, YEARS of research spent) are legitimate, and will coexist in a single set of data.

    Does this mean YOU have to recognize or agree with it? Of course, it does not. However, the facts are the facts and no amount of attempt to spin or revise them will do so.

    I do not have time for ignorant trolls.
    ignore list: 1948_Swell_Robinson, Darin, bgr, bronco2078, dallasactuary

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,874 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @pocketpiececommems said:

    Whats the difference though for another league having their stats added? Should they be added to the AL or NL? Strong played for the KC Monarchs and KC is an AL team. They also played less than 40 games in 1942 but is now recorded as the highest average that year. Same thing with Serreall even though Williams lead all of MLB in average homeruns and RBIs

    If a player is going to be allowed to play 40 games less than the rest of the league then the league leaders for the years they are not leaders anymore should be allowed to remove 40 games of their choice to see if they are back to being the leader. 🤔

    What's hilarious but not in a funny way, is the woke administrators who rammed this nonsense down the throats of the rest of us, have harmed the great MLB black players since 1947, whose records and accomplishments are now diminished.

  • RiveraFamilyCollectRiveraFamilyCollect Posts: 625 ✭✭✭✭

    I wouldn't bother engaging further. Its pretty clear that stevek is letting his emotions get in the way of rational thinking.
    "case closed" just means he doesn't need to explain himself and isn't willing to be debated.
    Not sure why he seems to be very personally invested in maintaining segregated baseball statistics.

    The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    @pocketpiececommems said:

    Whats the difference though for another league having their stats added? Should they be added to the AL or NL? Strong played for the KC Monarchs and KC is an AL team. They also played less than 40 games in 1942 but is now recorded as the highest average that year. Same thing with Serreall even though Williams lead all of MLB in average homeruns and RBIs

    If a player is going to be allowed to play 40 games less than the rest of the league then the league leaders for the years they are not leaders anymore should be allowed to remove 40 games of their choice to see if they are back to being the leader. 🤔

    What's hilarious but not in a funny way, is the woke administrators who rammed this nonsense down the throats of the rest of us, have harmed the great MLB black players since 1947, whose records and accomplishments are now diminished.

    Theyve harmed all MLB players of every race whose records will be diminished over time. It takes extra effort to sort out the records now and as time goes on more and more people will start believing that someone who played 33 games was the average leader that year etc.

    What will really be sad is if they start going through the HOF and editing the plaques taking accomplishments away from players because of it

    Missouri 14 OSU 3

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,874 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Mistlin said:

    @stevek said:

    @bgr said:
    It’s not revisionist history.

    >
    Well it could be called much worse than that. Such as a flat out lie. I was trying to be nice. 😉

    Even by 1962, ten years after the example, MLB was only 10% black. So this is indisputable proof that the Negro Leagues were not even close to the caliber of MLB, and it's no longer debatable.

    Case closed.

    (a) What percentage would you have accepted as proof?
    (b) it's not 'indisputable'
    (c) 'Case closed'? You're right. The Negro Leagues are considered a 'Major League' by the only people who have a say - no matter how many times you claim to the contrary.

    I already stated in this or another thread, to you or whoever it was. You win.

    Now open up a can of Bud Light with the pic of Dylan Mulvaney, and have yourself a good time.

  • RiveraFamilyCollectRiveraFamilyCollect Posts: 625 ✭✭✭✭

    And there it is ladies and gentlemen.
    Stevek has stopped pretending he isn't a bigot.

    The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.

  • MistlinMistlin Posts: 323 ✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    I already stated in this or another thread, to you or whoever it was. You win.

    Now open up a can of Bud Light with the pic of Dylan Mulvaney, and have yourself a good time.

    Steve, you and the others railing in these threads have allowed yourselves to be unwitting conscripts in a culture war that need not exist, but you have allowed yourselves to believe that any diversity or inclusion of minorities is somehow a bad thing.

    The fact that you have used 'woke' and Bud Light in this discussion is evidence that you have resorted to regurgitating talking points and stopped engaging in critical thought.

    While I wish for a different outcome, it's apparent that this line of 'thinking' will never change course. Progress, inclusivity, and diversity continues and rightfully so.

    I do not have time for ignorant trolls.
    ignore list: 1948_Swell_Robinson, Darin, bgr, bronco2078, dallasactuary

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,874 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Mistlin said:

    @stevek said:

    I already stated in this or another thread, to you or whoever it was. You win.

    Now open up a can of Bud Light with the pic of Dylan Mulvaney, and have yourself a good time.

    Steve, you and the others railing in these threads have allowed yourselves to be unwitting conscripts in a culture war that need not exist, but you have allowed yourselves to believe that any diversity or inclusion of minorities is somehow a bad thing.

    The fact that you have used 'woke' and Bud Light in this discussion is evidence that you have resorted to regurgitating talking points and stopped engaging in critical thought.

    While I wish for a different outcome, it's apparent that this line of 'thinking' will never change course. Progress, inclusivity, and diversity continues and rightfully so.

    Well...I hope this never happens to you. But if they're wheeling you to the hospital emergency room for a vital operation, and the nurse asks you which doctor do you want, the properly medically trained doctor or the DEI doctor hired by a woke administrator? I think we all know what your response will be. 😉

  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 4,871 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited June 6, 2024 11:45AM

    @bgr said:
    But in 2020 MLB decided that there was enough evidence to support the thesis that the NN2 and MLB were close in skill given the performance of former NN2 players in MLB. That’s why MLB decided to include the NN2 and NNL leagues in MLB. They haven’t decided that for other leagues but if you think there is merit you might petition them.

    Obviously, the only Negro League players who made it in MLB were the ones who were of MLB skill level. How does that prove anything about the Negro Leagues in general?

    I’m trying to wrap my head around this logic. So, based on the performance of high school players in the NFL (they all played in high school), we conclude that high school football is equivalent in skill to the NFL? 🤔

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @PaulMaul said:

    @bgr said:
    But in 2020 MLB decided that there was enough evidence to support the thesis that the NN2 and MLB were close in skill given the performance of former NN2 players in MLB. That’s why MLB decided to include the NN2 and NNL leagues in MLB. They haven’t decided that for other leagues but if you think there is merit you might petition them.

    I’m trying to wrap my head around this logic. So, based on the performance of high school players in the NFL (they all played in high school), we conclude that high school football is equivalent in skill to the NFL. 🤔

    Obviously, the only Negro League players who made it in MLB were the ones who were of MLB skill level. How does that prove anything about the Negro Leagues in general?

    I was thinking a cross-correlation technique could be used. You can use individual players who played in both leagues as your constant.

    Unfortunately the NN2 statistical records are not great.

    But... That said, if you just look at the 50s over time and see what happened on all the leader boards... The stars of the Negro Leagues translated well to becoming stars in MLB.

    This isn't anything crazy and I think it would be an accepted technique for this type of comparison. This seems completely different to me than saying:

    because NFL players played in high school, all high school players are equivalent in skill to the NFL. This is another logical fallacy similar to what Basebal21 was using in 'denying the antecedent'. This one is a similar hypothetical syllogism referred to as 'affirming the consequent'.

    While this probably isn't even true, your statement would be refined as...

    All NFL players played in High School, Therefore all High Schoolers can play in the NFL.

    It is reduced fully to.

    If P -> Q Then Q -> P.

    If you want to use hyperbole, just call me stupid and say I think it's reasonable to compare Pee-Wee football to the NFL or something. I'm not going to be offended and I'm not trying to drag anyone to my way of thinking.

  • PaulMaulPaulMaul Posts: 4,871 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited June 6, 2024 12:17PM

    @bgr said:

    @PaulMaul said:

    @bgr said:
    But in 2020 MLB decided that there was enough evidence to support the thesis that the NN2 and MLB were close in skill given the performance of former NN2 players in MLB. That’s why MLB decided to include the NN2 and NNL leagues in MLB. They haven’t decided that for other leagues but if you think there is merit you might petition them.

    I’m trying to wrap my head around this logic. So, based on the performance of high school players in the NFL (they all played in high school), we conclude that high school football is equivalent in skill to the NFL. 🤔

    Obviously, the only Negro League players who made it in MLB were the ones who were of MLB skill level. How does that prove anything about the Negro Leagues in general?

    I was thinking a cross-correlation technique could be used. You can use individual players who played in both leagues as your constant.

    Unfortunately the NN2 statistical records are not great.

    But... That said, if you just look at the 50s over time and see what happened on all the leader boards... The stars of the Negro Leagues translated well to becoming stars in MLB.

    This isn't anything crazy and I think it would be an accepted technique for this type of comparison. This seems completely different to me than saying:

    because NFL players played in high school, all high school players are equivalent in skill to the NFL. This is another logical fallacy similar to what Basebal21 was using in 'denying the antecedent'. This one is a similar hypothetical syllogism referred to as 'affirming the consequent'.

    While this probably isn't even true, your statement would be refined as...

    All NFL players played in High School, Therefore all High Schoolers can play in the NFL.

    It is reduced fully to.

    If P -> Q Then Q -> P.

    If you want to use hyperbole, just call me stupid and say I think it's reasonable to compare Pee-Wee football to the NFL or something. I'm not going to be offended and I'm not trying to drag anyone to my way of thinking.

    The fact that the biggest stars of the Negro Leagues were big stars in MLB proves nothing about the overall quality of the leagues. There were obviously black players of MLB quality. The Negro Leagues is the only place they could have played. They succeeded in MLB given the chance, as would be expected. How does this imply anything about the overall quality of Negro League players? I am not guilty of any logical fallacy. I’m simply giving another equivalent example of the fallacy you cited to show how silly it is.

    If Josh Gibson played in a league in his neighborhood, he’d be successful. If he played in MLB, he’d be successful. No conclusion can be drawn from that about the relative quality of those two leagues.

  • MistlinMistlin Posts: 323 ✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    @Mistlin said:

    @stevek said:

    I already stated in this or another thread, to you or whoever it was. You win.

    Now open up a can of Bud Light with the pic of Dylan Mulvaney, and have yourself a good time.

    Steve, you and the others railing in these threads have allowed yourselves to be unwitting conscripts in a culture war that need not exist, but you have allowed yourselves to believe that any diversity or inclusion of minorities is somehow a bad thing.

    The fact that you have used 'woke' and Bud Light in this discussion is evidence that you have resorted to regurgitating talking points and stopped engaging in critical thought.

    While I wish for a different outcome, it's apparent that this line of 'thinking' will never change course. Progress, inclusivity, and diversity continues and rightfully so.

    Well...I hope this never happens to you. But if they're wheeling you to the hospital emergency room for a vital operation, and the nurse asks you which doctor do you want, the properly medically trained doctor or the DEI doctor hired by a woke administrator? I think we all know what your response will be. 😉

    So, in this fantasyland you call your mind, you believe that a hospital would hire and employ an unqualified doctor because the administrator is 'woke'?

    The depths to which you lot have allowed yourselves to be drug gets unimaginably deeper with each comment.

    If you believe for a SECOND that any job is being fulfilled with unqualified people due to being 'woke', then you have no clue how the real world works.

    You know who I would not want to have treat me? Some entitled brat who got to medical school on their parents' money, who then paid off said school when they got into trouble and used their money and influence to get their kid to graduate.

    Stevek, I wish you well, and hope that someday you wake up from the fear-fueled and ignorant world view you have allowed yourself to be swallowed by.

    I do not have time for ignorant trolls.
    ignore list: 1948_Swell_Robinson, Darin, bgr, bronco2078, dallasactuary

  • RiveraFamilyCollectRiveraFamilyCollect Posts: 625 ✭✭✭✭

    @PCGS_Moderator

    Isn't there forum rules against making bigoted statements to forum members?

    The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.

  • stevekstevek Posts: 28,874 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Stevek, I wish you well, and hope that someday you wake up from the fear-fueled and ignorant world view you have allowed yourself to be swallowed by.

    It's a stone cold fact that this has been happening not only in the medical profession, but the airline industry, and way too much else. I think you're well aware of this. Ridiculously combining stats of two totally separate independent leagues, is just the latest example of some of the crazy lunacy going on out there.

    But I'll leave it at that. You're a newbie and may not realize this isn't the forum for further detailed discussion on this matter.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭✭

    @bgr said:

    @PaulMaul said:

    @bgr said:
    But in 2020 MLB decided that there was enough evidence to support the thesis that the NN2 and MLB were close in skill given the performance of former NN2 players in MLB. That’s why MLB decided to include the NN2 and NNL leagues in MLB. They haven’t decided that for other leagues but if you think there is merit you might petition them.

    I’m trying to wrap my head around this logic. So, based on the performance of high school players in the NFL (they all played in high school), we conclude that high school football is equivalent in skill to the NFL. 🤔

    Obviously, the only Negro League players who made it in MLB were the ones who were of MLB skill level. How does that prove anything about the Negro Leagues in general?

    I was thinking a cross-correlation technique could be used. You can use individual players who played in both leagues as your constant.

    Unfortunately the NN2 statistical records are not great.

    But... That said, if you just look at the 50s over time and see what happened on all the leader boards... The stars of the Negro Leagues translated well to becoming stars in MLB.

    This isn't anything crazy and I think it would be an accepted technique for this type of comparison. This seems completely different to me than saying:

    because NFL players played in high school, all high school players are equivalent in skill to the NFL. This is another logical fallacy similar to what Basebal21 was using in 'denying the antecedent'. This one is a similar hypothetical syllogism referred to as 'affirming the consequent'.

    While this probably isn't even true, your statement would be refined as...

    All NFL players played in High School, Therefore all High Schoolers can play in the NFL.

    It is reduced fully to.

    If P -> Q Then Q -> P.

    If you want to use hyperbole, just call me stupid and say I think it's reasonable to compare Pee-Wee football to the NFL or something. I'm not going to be offended and I'm not trying to drag anyone to my way of thinking.

    I understand why you keep moving the goal posts and trying rto change the argument or why people are claiming racism is why people dont want the leagues stats merged.

    I'll ask again a simple yes or no question.

    Should ALL "major league" stats be merged from the "major leagues" If the answer is yes than Japan and Mexico should be included. If the answer is no than Negro League stats should also be excluded.

    Its a very simple premise that has no arguments other than political for picking and choosing which league to merge with especially when its the league with the shortest season and most inaccurate record keeping

    You either merge them all or none. Its quite simple.

    Missouri 14 OSU 3

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The fact that the biggest stars of the Negro Leagues were big stars in MLB proves nothing about the overall quality of the leagues. There were obviously black players of MLB quality. The Negro Leagues is the only place they could have played. They succeeded in MLB given the chance, as would be expected. How does this imply anything about the overall quality of Negro League players? I am not guilty of any logical fallacy. I’m simply giving another equivalent example of the fallacy you cited to show how silly it is.

    If Josh Gibson played in a league in his neighborhood, he’d be successful. If he played in MLB, he’d be successful. No conclusion can be drawn from that about the relative quality of those two leagues.

    That isn't my argument. I didn't think that my suggestion that cross-correlation could be used would be misunderstood.

    As far as fallacies are concerned, if you were intending your example merely as hyperbole to explain the ridiculousness, then perhaps it wouldn't be "affirming the consequent" but then instead... simply a straw man argument.

    Let's say, hypothetically, using Mays, that Mays was 20% above the mean in the Negro Leagues, and he was 20% above the mean in the MLB. Do you disagree that we can now use a form of syllogism to measure the Negro League and the MLB? I understand that there are other variables, but I'm fine uncovering the interesting ones and discussing. There are probably other forms of deductive reasoning one could use here.

  • MCMLVToppsMCMLVTopps Posts: 4,830 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I've been on these boards for almost 19 years...like many topics before this one, heated exchanges tend to go waaaaay off the rails. I've seen what appeared to be innocous posts find a fair amount of respondents gone in a poof. We are merely guests in the PSA sandbox, I suggest everybody take a breath and not push the envelope, or risk being vaporized.

  • bgrbgr Posts: 1,620 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I understand why you keep moving the goal posts and trying rto change the argument or why people are claiming racism is why people dont want the leagues stats merged.

    I have not made any claims which assert "racism is why people dont want the leagues stats merged." and to be clear: I am not making that statement about anyone here. I would say that "racism" is likely a consideration in both why this decision was made by MLB (as a response to a history of racism in baseball specifically impacting the time we're discussing) and I would say that there are very likely to be people out there in the wilds who believe that the stats should not be merged because of some primary racial consideration.

    I would really prefer to speak to the statistics and their impact on the records and how we mitigate the negative impact we have observed.

    I'll ask again a simple yes or no question.

    Just because you want a yes or no answer doesn't mean you will get one. Life is full of nuance.

    Should ALL "major league" stats be merged from the "major leagues" If the answer is yes than Japan and Mexico should be included. If the answer is no than Negro League stats should also be excluded.

    I'm not qualified to make this decision. I don't know what data the committee which recommended their inclusion to MLB used or the data which MLB leveraged, if any, along with that recommendation, to make their decision... in 2020.

    I would not have included the Negro Leagues in MLB statistics. Not because I don't think the quality of the league or players were subpar. But, because from what I have seen of the collected data and the way anecdotal information was included... I think that's poor form.

    But I also would not have included the Union Association, Players League, Federal League, etc. As I learn and read more about the organization and format of some of the Negro Leagues which were recognized, I also find that a few of those really came along for the ride, to the point that I would really only consider the NN2 league and perhaps even the Negro American League to be a "league of approximate parity" to the AL & NL at the time.

    Its a very simple premise that has no arguments other than political for picking and choosing which league to merge with especially when its the league with the shortest season and most inaccurate record keeping

    You either merge them all or none. Its quite simple.

    I could say you merge one, but not two, six, but not four. It's quite simple.

    Yeah we can make this witch's brew however we want. the world is our oyster. It is simple.

    I just want to adjust the criteria so that the records make sense and we have a way to ingest this data without blowing up records because whoever from the Memphis Red Knickers hit .644 in 16 plate appearances. We can argue about the legitimacy and cry about the woke mob and whatever all day, but the leagues were added and the first batch of stats has been certified... and there will be more.

    Chill!

  • MistlinMistlin Posts: 323 ✭✭✭

    @stevek said:

    Stevek, I wish you well, and hope that someday you wake up from the fear-fueled and ignorant world view you have allowed yourself to be swallowed by.

    It's a stone cold fact that this has been happening not only in the medical profession, but the airline industry, and way too much else. I think you're well aware of this. Ridiculously combining stats of two totally separate independent leagues, is just the latest example of some of the crazy lunacy going on out there.

    But I'll leave it at that. You're a newbie and may not realize this isn't the forum for further detailed discussion on this matter.

    "stone cold fact" with no evidence to back it up is heresay and nonsense.

    If there were a rash of doctors hired by "woke" administrators who were not qualified to practice medicine, we would have unending stories about the huge spike in malpractice lawsuits against all of these diversity hires. The fact remains: there has not been any such spike.

    Likewise, the inclusion of Negro League players into the office Major League record books is some "woke" gone wild - it was a years-long investigation of the data after determining that the players in the league were Major League-caliber, as evidenced by the large number of players who went to MLB after Jackie Robinson.

    Those claiming a "woke" mentality is the only determining factor in any minority achieving success is based in ignorance and fear. The primary fear being their unearned priority status is rapidly eroding and they will be forced to compete in a world in which they were given an advantage from the start.

    I said in the other thread, and I will say it here: MLB has made their ruling, and they are the sole arbiters of their official records.

    Enjoy the new era! I know I am! Anything which broadens the game's history and audience is good for the game. Why you want to keep it closed off is beyond me.

    I do not have time for ignorant trolls.
    ignore list: 1948_Swell_Robinson, Darin, bgr, bronco2078, dallasactuary

This discussion has been closed.