Is Jack Morris psychic?
Skinpinch
Posts: 1,531
in Sports Talk
Sorry to begin a new thread, but the other ones are onto different topics than the original post. But these topics got me to wonder, is Jack Morris psychic. I have a fella who stakes his life on the fact that MLB players do indeed rise to the post season pressures and all of a sudden morph into a better player than what they truly are.
The theory goes that they save their best for the most crucial time in the season. They 'rise to the occasion'.
When I think of this, Jack Morris must be psychic. Why? Because he must know that his team will make the world series when the seasons starts, because he simply doesn't pitch as good during the season. He doesn't want to go into his superman mode too early and waste it on the regular season. Morris says..."Why give up only three runs per game in the regular seasons. I can give up my customary four, and when we make it to the world series, THEN I can become that 3 run a game guy...you know, when it counts."
Then Jack makes the correct prediction and he makes it to the ALCS. Good job Jack. But now he shows his pyscic awareness again. You see, rising to the occasion means rising to the moment, and at the moment the ALCS IS THE MOST CRUCIAL TIME OF THE YEAR. WIN OR GO HOME, it doesn't get any more pressureized! Ahh, but Jack Morris isn't fazed! He knows they will go on.
You see, he knows so well that his team will win the pressure packed ALCS that he decides to give up nearly FIVE RUNS A GAME in his ALCS experiences! FIVE. Jack is confident. He says, "I'm not worried, I don't have to pitch my best, this is only the ALCS, not the big dance. I can give up five runs a game here, it doesn't matter at all! I'll save my best for last" Turns out Jack was right as his ALCS ERA checks in at 4.87. Good planning Jack.
It turns out that Morris was indeed a psychic as they did advance tot he world series, and low and behold when he got to the big dance, he gave up his three runs per game, and made himself a full run better of a pitcher, an astounding feat! Said Morris, "I told you guys. This is what counts. I don't need to pitch as well during those other times. This is the big dance. Yeah, that guy Stieb feels the pressure of the regular season and he wastes his energy by giving up only three runs a game during that season. What a fool! I stick with the four and save my three for the World Series. The playoffs? Who cares about them. I can give up my five a game without harm! George Brett use to care too much about them, and hit this big home run before in the ALCS. I don't care. I gave up my five, this isn't the big dance."
I give Morris credit for being pyschic. He failed to succumb to the pressure of the regualr season. Even though on April 10th everyone is jockeying for a chance to play in the post season and the pressure begins, he didn't give in. He held back his best for when needed. Then when they got to the ALCS, he held back even more and allowed even more runs per game. 4.87 to be exact. Then he was right, after holding back all those times that make pressure on other players, he saved his pressure play for the World Series, and gave up his three runs per game. Great job Jack.
I feel sorry for his 1980, 1982, 1989, and 1990 teammates though, as his plan failed and his Four plus runs a game strategy in the regular season never got him to the dances. But who cares about those seasons and others, his plan worked three other times! He is human, and is allowed to fail at his masterful plan once in a while(or 15 times).
The theory goes that they save their best for the most crucial time in the season. They 'rise to the occasion'.
When I think of this, Jack Morris must be psychic. Why? Because he must know that his team will make the world series when the seasons starts, because he simply doesn't pitch as good during the season. He doesn't want to go into his superman mode too early and waste it on the regular season. Morris says..."Why give up only three runs per game in the regular seasons. I can give up my customary four, and when we make it to the world series, THEN I can become that 3 run a game guy...you know, when it counts."
Then Jack makes the correct prediction and he makes it to the ALCS. Good job Jack. But now he shows his pyscic awareness again. You see, rising to the occasion means rising to the moment, and at the moment the ALCS IS THE MOST CRUCIAL TIME OF THE YEAR. WIN OR GO HOME, it doesn't get any more pressureized! Ahh, but Jack Morris isn't fazed! He knows they will go on.
You see, he knows so well that his team will win the pressure packed ALCS that he decides to give up nearly FIVE RUNS A GAME in his ALCS experiences! FIVE. Jack is confident. He says, "I'm not worried, I don't have to pitch my best, this is only the ALCS, not the big dance. I can give up five runs a game here, it doesn't matter at all! I'll save my best for last" Turns out Jack was right as his ALCS ERA checks in at 4.87. Good planning Jack.
It turns out that Morris was indeed a psychic as they did advance tot he world series, and low and behold when he got to the big dance, he gave up his three runs per game, and made himself a full run better of a pitcher, an astounding feat! Said Morris, "I told you guys. This is what counts. I don't need to pitch as well during those other times. This is the big dance. Yeah, that guy Stieb feels the pressure of the regular season and he wastes his energy by giving up only three runs a game during that season. What a fool! I stick with the four and save my three for the World Series. The playoffs? Who cares about them. I can give up my five a game without harm! George Brett use to care too much about them, and hit this big home run before in the ALCS. I don't care. I gave up my five, this isn't the big dance."
I give Morris credit for being pyschic. He failed to succumb to the pressure of the regualr season. Even though on April 10th everyone is jockeying for a chance to play in the post season and the pressure begins, he didn't give in. He held back his best for when needed. Then when they got to the ALCS, he held back even more and allowed even more runs per game. 4.87 to be exact. Then he was right, after holding back all those times that make pressure on other players, he saved his pressure play for the World Series, and gave up his three runs per game. Great job Jack.
I feel sorry for his 1980, 1982, 1989, and 1990 teammates though, as his plan failed and his Four plus runs a game strategy in the regular season never got him to the dances. But who cares about those seasons and others, his plan worked three other times! He is human, and is allowed to fail at his masterful plan once in a while(or 15 times).
0
Comments
You are?
Steve
I think it is time for you to find a new topic. (I hope anyway)
how about Pujo;s and roids. You seem a lil psychic on that thread yourself.
Steve
Steve
WP, if the topic is so dead, why the need to post 3 replies in this thread?
-- Yogi Berra
Glynn, you should probably contact Jack and his psychic abilities. I am so impressed that he just knew he would make it to the World Series that he became a 5 run a game guy in the ALCS. Everybody else around him knew of the do or die situation, but not Morris! He failed to realize it, hence his lesser pitching. I guess sometimes ignorance is bliss...as I'm sure you know already
Glynn, you probably need to reread the first post. Realize the moment you are in during MLB IS the occasion and IS the pressure. It is there all regular season. Once you hit the ALCS, then THAT is the moment and THAT is the pressure. Then once you hit hte WS that is the moment and pressure. You see, at that level, there is always the pressure. I guess Morris just skipped all the other pressure times and didn't pitch until the final pressure(the WS). He was psychic. He knew he didn't need to pitch as well all those other times, just as quoted above
If he had an ability to pitch to the situation, then those are the situations, and he didn't do it. A 2.97 ERA in a few WS starts is one bad inning away from being a 3.97 ERA. SAMPLE SIZE young man. Thats why you use the regular season as the sample size makes a valid assessment.
And of course the manchild Axhole can't help but follow my every post.
Steve
Morris pitched 8 seasons - 5 with Detroit (81, 83, 86. 87, 88), 2 with Toronto (92,93) and 1 with Minnesota (1991) where his teams could be considered fighting for the pennant. In those 8 seasons his record from August to the end of the season:
IP 777 2/3
W 53
L 31
ERA 3.16
In games where he faced the team directly ahead or behind in the standings his record:
IP 88 2/3
W 6
L 4
ERA 3.45
In those 11 starts he pitched 8 or more innings on 8 occasions.
Morris was a notoriously slow starter but his era from August to the end of the season:
Overall 3.56
In pennant race 3.16
Not in pennant race 4.06
Morris' ERA in games where he didn't have a big lead was no better than 3.85. He didn't pitch to the score. If anybody does pitch to the score, it hasn't translated into any results different than what is known already.
Yes I have played ball, and in fact I still do. Been a pitcher for quite some time, and can also rake. I wouldn't miind setting up a game with you if you desire.
His career ERA IS going to be lower in the years he was involved in pennant races because that number may be influenced by the fact that his pennant race years happen to be his best overall ERA years...or because there may have been one or two dominant seasosons to skew that number.
Morris career monthly ERA's are...
April 4.45
May 3.99
june 4.12
July 3.85
August 3.91
Septbemer 3.29
Is his ERA lower in September because he pitches better due to being in a pennant race? Lets see...
These are his years where he was NOT involved in a September pennant race. Listed is his Sep ERA and his Overall year ERA.
'78 4.95 SEP and 4.33 overall
'79 2.75 and 3.28
'80 3.63 and 4.18
'82 3.16 and 4.06
'85 3.75 and 3.33
'86 2.47 and 3.27 *may or may not be considerd a pennant race
'89 4.41 and 4.86
'90 2.83 and 4.51
So in NON PENNANT race years he was better in September in six out of his eight years. So he excelled in September regardless of the race factor. Why did he excel? Could be taking advantage of call ups, could be good durability, could be that his off speed pitches work better when he is a bit more fatigued. Regardless of the reason, it seems he does better in September, but being in a pennant race isn't one of the factors.
Here are the pennant race seasons:
'81 3.73 Sep and 3.05 overall
'83 2.78 and 3.34
'84 3.89 and 3.60 *had a big lead, iffy categorization here
'87 3.27 and 3.38
'88 3.46 and 3.94
'91 1.93 and 3.43
'92 3.00 and 4.04
'93 5.40 and 6.19
In eight pennant race seasons, he pitched better in September in six of them(although '84 was a big lead and is iffy to put in there). Overall, his two lists look the same with no difference on how he pitched in the pennant race.
Notice how the pennant years of '91 and '92 resemble the NON pennant years of '82 and '90. He dominated in September in those four seasons, two of which were pennant races, two of which were not.
So all of his pennant race Septembers, and NON pennant race Septembers look basically the same. There may be factors as to why he pitches better in Septbember, but it sure looks like being in a pennant race isn't one of them. He didn't 'raise' his game to any better degree in the pennant race seasons than what he did in the NON pennant race seasons.
Also, just because you TYPE IN CAPS, it doesn't prove your point; it only shows your blind arrogance.
/ $0.02
I guess with that type of contribution is why they call it your .02 cents.
Anyway, it has nothing to do with Bill James. It has to do with with showing that these mythical claims are simply not true. The initial claim of pitching to the score is held so dearly by Jack Morris fans, and it simply is not true.
People's minds draw all sorts of perceptions, and it just isn't backed up with reality, just like the Fenway guy who insisted on Joe Carter gettting dozens of late inning hits to win games at Fenway. The guy swore he saw them and was there. In reality, there was only ONE game that even came close to fitting the guys criteria.
If you don't like the truth, that is fine. You can simply agree with me then when I say Bo Jackson was better than Ted Williams by virtue of being a better runner, defender, thrower, and by hitting the ball further. Oh, and by not 'choking' in hte playoffs, and by being a better teammate. Forget the stats, they is something for computers. That is the garbage typical sports fans spew...until they get a dose of reality thrown their way(just like all the Morris information).
Next time you see Atlas, tell him to stop moving so much.
As for the caps, it doesn't have to prove the point, the information should do it already. Some need a little more emphasis.
P.S. The strangest thing is always when somebody says stats don't show anything, then they try to prove their point by USING A STAT! Of course, it is typically a stat with no validity, but lets not let that get in the way. I will just contact the Fenway guy to get his perception on the truth.
BY THE WAY, BEFORE BILL JAMES WAS BORN, MR. CHADWICK FIRST STARTED KEEPING ORGANIZED STATS WAY BACK IN THE 1800'S. AS THE GAME EVOLVED, BETTER MEASUREMENTS(STATS) WERE USED TO SEE HOW GOOD A PLAYER REALLY WAS, AND THAT EVOLUTION KEEPS COMING. JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE IT OR UNDERSTAND IT DOESN'T MAKE IT INACCURATE. SO MAYBE YOU SHOULD SAY YOU WISH CHADWICK WERE NEVER BORN, OR BRANCH RICKEY.
<< <i>It's these kind of posts and threads that make me wish Bill James was never born.
>>
And there were many Catholics who wished Galileo had never been born. It can be painful to find out that the things one has believed for a long time have never been true. But we are better off accepting that the Earth does revolve around the Sun, that there is no Santa Claus and that Jack Morris wasn't a great pitcher.
But, as skinpinch said, James really isn't necessary to this discovery. I think James' greatest contribution is in opening people's eyes to the fact they do not have to accept what they have been told about what makes a player great or about which players are great. Anyone who is willing to look at the available information with an open mind can figure it out for themselves. And anyone who is not will continue to believe that Jack Morris was great, that the Sun revolves around the Earth, or any other foolishness they want to believe.
<< <i>Skinpinch has managed to make spammy and axtell look like rocket scientists get over it so he cost your friend some $ you are a loser and a moron. >>
Who's alt ID are you? You just registered in Mar 06, long after spammy was gone.
If you just look at September/October regular season you would see the following:
Overall era - 3.26
in pennant race - 3.04
not in pennant race - 3.52
His numbers for August and September I already posted. I understand where you are saying his era in September is lower in pennant years because he was better over-all that year and that is certainly true, but when you throw August numbers into the mix he pitches much better in a pennant race.
In 1984 on Sept 1, they were NINE games up! Call me crazy, but in 1986 they were nine out, and in 1984 they were nine up, yet you are saying one is a pennant race while the other isn't? This was one of his lesser Septembers, again that is heavily influencing your data.
Aro, the key is how much he raises his level of ability. The fact that he was a better pitcher in those years isn't a mere side note, it is a key. His overall ERA is going to be lower in the pennant race years because he was a better pitcher overall those years. His September ERA will follow the same way.
You need to see how much exactly he raised his game in the pennant years, and then you need to see how much he raised his game in the NON pennant years. Then you need to compare the two. Even then, you still run into the consistency problem. In that study it may be one or two years that is weighing down the overall.
Then it still beehoves me to point out the psychic point at the top. On APril 5th EVERYBODY is in a pennant race. Either Morris is psychic or stupid, because if he has some magic ability to raise himself to be a better pitcher, he should be using it ALL YEAR. Don't you think? WOuldn't you? I would. Heck, if I knew I had a secret that I unleashed every September, I would use it every month and get to the post season more often. That is why it is silly to think he has such an ability.
If this race contention were true, then his splits should be even more lopsided only looking at September. If you go back to the beginning of August, why not July? Why not every April? It is always a pennant race in April.
Stown, maybe I will judge players on how pretty their swings look from now on
I wonder how much those last 3 or 4 years where Morris had ERA's over 6 affected his overall numbers.
Steve
Jesus, this is friggin' tedious.
Wisdom, intelligence, instinct. Quantify those and push the numbers around.
Just watch the game man and enjoy the guys smacking the ball and tossing it around.
SoFlPhilly, all those attriubte you suggested may lead to an increase in his performance for sure, but it is already reflected in a players results. After all, if a MORON and a WISE MAN each had a the exact same performance, it really makes no difference...they performed the same. Maybe the WISE MAN had lesser physical ability and used his wit more to get his results, but in the end they were of equal value, regardless of the attributes that got them there.
Philly, some people just like to watch and relax. I go into that mode often as well. However, I have always liked to follow it a little deeper
Yes i agree it is. I was hoping that you would have done it for me as i am lazy.
Steve
So the answer is?
<< <i>Steve, that is something easily figured, no need to wonder.
SoFlPhilly, all those attriubte you suggested may lead to an increase in his performance for sure, but it is already reflected in a players results. After all, if a MORON and a WISE MAN each had a the exact same performance, it really makes no difference...they performed the same. Maybe the WISE MAN had lesser physical ability and used his wit more to get his results, but in the end they were of equal value, regardless of the attributes that got them there.
Philly, some people just like to watch and relax. I go into that mode often as well. However, I have always liked to follow it a little deeper
Just as I thought.
No room for the intangible.
That is the weakness in your arguments.
If you are saying that smarts etc., are a good predictor in future baseball performance, then that is a different debate. However, the stuff you are talking about is a POOR predictor of future performance when already at the MLB level! By plenty of experience and gains, I will tell you that if you stake anything of value on the stuff you are referring to it will land you in the poor house! There are much more effective ways. I wouldn't totally discount it, but other things are better. Besides most MLB players ALL have those intangibles you are referring to. You don't get to that a high a level without it. The problem with fans is that they assign it to the players who have had the good fortune to get hot in post season, and all the stuff I have been debunking. VERY FAULTY.
I will say that the stuff you are talking about will have more application the lower you go in the baseball levels, though even then when scouts rely on that info, they are often just throwing darts.
The absolute best predictor of a MLB is the results they have accumulated...it makes no difference the avenue they took to get them, BUT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU ARE USING THE CORRECT NUMBERS! That is where most fans go wrong, they look at the wrong stuff.
The best predictor of Minor League players is also their results, coupled with their tools(scouting is huge there), and their mental makeup to see if they will be able to handle the pressures and rigors of MLB. Most minor league players have that by now though, or they wouldn't even make it there.
The best predictor of HIGH SCHOOL players is their tools, and their mental makeup etc... Results are mostly meaningless for various reasons.
Steve, are you referring to his basic career ERA?
Morris
Overall ERA August September October 3.56 Career ERA 3.90
In Pennant Race 3.13 ERA during season of Pennant Race 3.78
Not In Pennant Race 3.96 ERA during season not in Pennant Race 3.99
In games against the #1 team in a Pennant Race + post-season he made 24 starts.
His record:
13-8 Record ERA 3.63 averaging 7 2/3 innings per start and pitched 8 or more innings 14 times
His numbers show that he pitches better in important games. Why? Random luck, cheating, more focused, throws harder, whatever - he does pitch better.
Obviously, he does not pitch better to a tune of a 1.50 era but he is slightly better. He does not have some mythical ability but he pitches better in important games. I suppose this reason is why some pitchers throw 90-92 miles per hour during the season and than in the post-season throw 95-96. Not quite the Robert Horry of baseball but improved, nonetheless.
Also, you mention you have played/play competitive baseball yet you insist that pressure is not a factor when evaluating major league players. So on your teams everybody plays to their exact abilities regardless of the situation? The highest OPS player is the man you want at the plate in a tie game in the ninth with all of the pressure automatically? The best ERA pitcher is the man you want on the mound in a big game? I would guess you have played with people that perform very well and very poorly under pressure.
Major leaguers succumb to pressure all the time. Pressure affects different players in different ways. Just because I cannot measure that pressure does not mean it does not exist.
Anyway, I am done with the Morris debate. I do not think he is a Hall of Famer. The stats show he does not pitch to the score and while I feel he elevates his performance in big games, I can see the other viewpoint.
Steve
<< <i>Stown,
I guess with that type of contribution is why they call it your .02 cents.
Anyway, it has nothing to do with Bill James. It has to do with with showing that these mythical claims are simply not true. The initial claim of pitching to the score is held so dearly by Jack Morris fans, and it simply is not true.
People's minds draw all sorts of perceptions, and it just isn't backed up with reality, just like the Fenway guy who insisted on Joe Carter gettting dozens of late inning hits to win games at Fenway. The guy swore he saw them and was there. In reality, there was only ONE game that even came close to fitting the guys criteria.
If you don't like the truth, that is fine. You can simply agree with me then when I say Bo Jackson was better than Ted Williams by virtue of being a better runner, defender, thrower, and by hitting the ball further. Oh, and by not 'choking' in hte playoffs, and by being a better teammate. Forget the stats, they is something for computers. That is the garbage typical sports fans spew...until they get a dose of reality thrown their way(just like all the Morris information).
Next time you see Atlas, tell him to stop moving so much.
As for the caps, it doesn't have to prove the point, the information should do it already. Some need a little more emphasis.
P.S. The strangest thing is always when somebody says stats don't show anything, then they try to prove their point by USING A STAT! Of course, it is typically a stat with no validity, but lets not let that get in the way. I will just contact the Fenway guy to get his perception on the truth.
BY THE WAY, BEFORE BILL JAMES WAS BORN, MR. CHADWICK FIRST STARTED KEEPING ORGANIZED STATS WAY BACK IN THE 1800'S. AS THE GAME EVOLVED, BETTER MEASUREMENTS(STATS) WERE USED TO SEE HOW GOOD A PLAYER REALLY WAS, AND THAT EVOLUTION KEEPS COMING. JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE IT OR UNDERSTAND IT DOESN'T MAKE IT INACCURATE. SO MAYBE YOU SHOULD SAY YOU WISH CHADWICK WERE NEVER BORN, OR BRANCH RICKEY. >>
From Dallas
<< <i>
<< <i>It's these kind of posts and threads that make me wish Bill James was never born.
>>
And there were many Catholics who wished Galileo had never been born. It can be painful to find out that the things one has believed for a long time have never been true. But we are better off accepting that the Earth does revolve around the Sun, that there is no Santa Claus and that Jack Morris wasn't a great pitcher.
But, as skinpinch said, James really isn't necessary to this discovery. I think James' greatest contribution is in opening people's eyes to the fact they do not have to accept what they have been told about what makes a player great or about which players are great. Anyone who is willing to look at the available information with an open mind can figure it out for themselves. And anyone who is not will continue to believe that Jack Morris was great, that the Sun revolves around the Earth, or any other foolishness they want to believe. >>
Let me start that this isn't just about Jack Morris... It's about different methods of analyzing a players performance. Both of you subscribe to Bill James, which is fine with me. The problem is, MOST, not all, statatitions say their perspective is irrefutable, period. I deal with numbers all day, so I know how to place less or more emphasis on a particular number if you want to "prove" to be right.
I'm not saying Bill James' method is right or wrong. It's only a method of analyzing numbers and scenarios... However, it can't measure a player's heart, determination, and attitude which other players thrive on. You can't put on a number on that, period.
Finally, it's all about delievery. I actually enjoy reading your posts, Dallas. You give your opinion without needing to shove it down our throats... May disagree but you respect others opinions.
Skin... Well.. Thanks for proving my point. Let me know when a number is developed that can measure a person's precence in the clubhouse.
Some played 1 game, some 2 and so on. To say that he was not great is just not true. Compared to his peers (all of them) he certaintly was among the top 50 during that time?
was he 'great enough' to be elected to the HOF? his stats compare favorably to many already in. Now guys can break his stats down anyway they wish but the fact remains that he was a number 1 starter on major league teams for many years. Some of us do not need to know what he did when the score was 5 to 1 in his favor or vice versa. Others do not really care that he won 254 games claiming that wins mean nothing, ha! Runs allowed, runs saved etc. The bottom line is that he was a bonafide number one starter that excelled in many important games during his 18 yr career. To down play his accomplishments because his ERA is 3.90 seems a little absurd to me.
A few guys (notably skip) seem to feel that their analysis is the final word. That they have found a way to determine a players worth soley on stats. Nothing could be further from the truth IMO.
The analysis is flawed simply because it lacks certain intangibles not seen in boxscores.
Steve
Aro, actually I do agree that pressure etc. does exist at the MLB level, as guys like Steve Blass, Ankiel, or Wohlers shows. However, there isn't much variance at all between the players though(when isolated to the greatest degree). The problem is that fans just assign it to guys based on faulty post season numbers when there are so many other factors that account for those results. As a result, players get artificial boosts in value, or unfair downgrades.
The funny thing about me personally(you brough it up, so it ain't boasting or anything). In my circle I've actually been known as the step up guy, both at the plate and on the hill. In fact, I just came across the paper where I had pitched two complete games in a span of 34 hours to win a championship(this on a bad arm to begin with). Also went 6 for 6 in those games. Have hit many walk off home runs, and almost never failed in the late innings with a man on. I once played a whole season with a torn groin muscle. I either got a single, HR, or out on any batted ball(still drew my walks). I know all about that stuff.
Stown, Dallas is a much more pleasant read than me(and he is very good). I'm a little more argumentative...its my release.
As for clubhouse presence? No, there is no number for that. BUT, a good analysis accounts for 95% of the value of a player etc...
CLubhouse presence is often overblown and is usually assigned after the fact(as in the team just won a WS, thus his presence must be the reason). As a result guys like Joe Girardi get paid well to go to another team and the magic never seems to work in the new place(which usually has lesser talent of course). Actually, the effect of players can be looked at. To say that Roger Clemens's presence makes Roy Oswalt better, or any other scenario like that usually doesn't hold up. I'm not discounting the 'big brother' factor, or 'father figure' factor that some guys get helped by. But for the most part, a guy is what he is regardless of who he plays with.
Any other personal attribute is already measured in his performance as I mentioned earlier.
P.S. Steve, compared to you and me, Morris was a GOD! Compared to Stieb, Guidry, or Reuschel he wasn't.
His intangibles are already measured in his performance. My analysis was compared to the AVERAGE pitcher, it is darn accurate on how well he fared compared to league average pitcher(pretty concrete). If compared to the AVERAGE REPLACEMENT pitcher, THEN he is more like you are saying, AND THAT IS WHERE THE OPINION AND PHILOSOPHY COMES IN! His years with a sub par league ERA and 260 innings have value, and that isn't shown in the runs saved I ran. That is another topic.
stown - I appreciate the kind words but I want to leave you with some good advice. Regardless of which posts you enjoy more, if you ever have to bet on which of skinpinch or I is correct about something you would be smart to go with skinpinch. I enjoy digging into statistics - as my ID probably gives away - but I only do it when something doesn't sound right to me and I am still learning a great deal each time I do. And skinpinch is one of the people I am learning from.
It is certainly fair to describe me as one who subscribes to Bill James. In general, I think Bill James - although he has made what I think are a few significant mistakes - has done an exemplary job of ranking the greatest players of all time and I believe that it is fair to say that he knows more about what makes a player great than any other person alive. But, and James would be the first to encourage me in this, I do not believe that Morris is overrated because Bill James left Morris out of his top 100 pitchers. I believe it, in part, because Bill James has shown me how to go about evaluating a player without bias. Having done that with Morris, I strongly agree with James. But, Bill James also believes that Sandy Koufax is the 10th greatest pitcher ever (as of 7 years ago) and that Dennis Eckersley was the 32nd best. Looking at the same evidence as James I think he has reached the wrong conclusion by placing too much importance on certain factors and not enough on others and has overranked both pitchers. By the same token, I think he has underranked Jim Kaat and Bret Saberhagen. But, James and I could discuss his rankings and my own rankings using a common language (largely written by James) that does not include false memories, overreliance on one or two games or series, or any other "noise" that distracts from the true measure of these players. Maybe he could convince me Koufax deserved that rank; I am almost sure I could convince him that Dennis Eckersley did not.
Steve