Jaxxr, it is time to end all of this, it is time for progress...
Hoopster
Posts: 1,169
in Sports Talk
<< <i>Jim Rice has quite reasonable HOFconsideration value, and just narrowly missed selection last year,getting 71% of the vote, he has some stat betterment in several areas, HRs and Slugging especially, over a peer HOFer or two. He is ranked qualified by 3 of 4 popular and widely used tests, he has had a few very noteable single season marks. The former AL MVP has a career combination of power and batting average, that is surpassed by only a few HOF batters.
A guy like Dave Kingman, the actual topic of this thread, has some, but relatively few, HOF credentials, and is far removed from any real HOF consideration, and probably light years away from a truly elite member of the baseball HOF, Honus Wagner.
>>Jaxxr, I am not going to slam this post of yours, as it plays on the vagueness of what constitutes a Hall of Famer. You take a few liberties in there, and I won't dwell on them, but the spirit of the post can be reasonably debated on both ends, and it is more on the opinion area.
But once you start getting into the nuts and bolts of 'better' or 'baseball value', then you have to be far more scientific about it, because the good measurements are just that. They are studied, re studied, tested for validity, and then again. Baeball hitting is quite condusive to this method.
In fact, what you are saying in that post is pretty close to what the good scientifically valid methods say about the whole Rice/Murray, Kingman/wagner thing. Rice is appx 300 runs in value from Murray. With some tinkering or lessening of the ballpark factor, it is possible to reduce that to around 275. While Kingman is like 900 or more runs from Wagner.
Rice may even be more famous than Murray(say back in 1989). Rice has a large reputation, and somehow it is even larger than guys who were on his team that were his equal or even a bit better. Nobody can deny that. From that angle, a case for the Hall of Fame, coupled with his very good performance on the field, is reasonable.
BUt the moment you start doing the odd statistical evaluative methods you did, and try to make Rice as good as a player who was clearly better, then opinion is reduced to only a very small factor in that type of study, because as stated, those findings are far more scientific and valid when done properly. I have to say you botched them big time, and the weasel commment I made was just, because you were trying to be sneaky and find an angle. You did that stuff all along, and that never leads to the intelligent conversations you desire on these topics...ESPECIALLY THE STATISTICAL EVALUATIVE ONES.
You can't pick and choose to find something that might support your case, and then ignore the other 99% of the items that don't.
When I did that Fenway study with the primary hitters of that time, and the Oakland study, they all said the same thing. All the scientific studies said the same thing about Fenway, but you chose to pick the ONE item that said otherwise, and ignored the other 99%. You dwelled on Rice being better at Yankee stadium, and figured that this one instance discounts the other 99%. But I broke down the Yankee stadium aspect with the other players, and it shows it was merely more of a random event. The evidence was extremely strong, and if you desire intelligent and polite discussion, then you need to add it as well. That strong evidence should have been acknowledged in obvious fashion, but instead it was just completely dismissed....how on earth could anybody reciprocate with something productive whent hat occurs?
If you want intelligent discussion, then add that stuff that demands it, use stuff that is valid, and for the love of god, do not let bias get in the way. That ruins any chance of intelligent discussion to occur.
I should not have called you anything mentally retarded, or missing chromosomes...that was mean and wrong, I am sorry for that.
-hoopster/skinpinch
0
Comments
The more you guys do this, the less its removing doubt in the minds of many.
Food for thought.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
THe whole Rice saga ends soon though. Once he is elected, or not, the luster of "should he" will be gone.
Some feel that if he is elected, he may just continued to be used as the benchmark for more lesser qualified people to be elected. That won't happen to near the degree of IF he should be.
It all ends soon regardless, LOL!
<< <i>The exchange betwrrn Jaxxr & Skin on the Kingman thread rivals the Axtell/Stown matches of days gone by..
Oh the good 'ole days!