Yaz had super years in 1965, 1967(WOW) ,1968,1969 and 1970 maybe one last hurrah in 1977. Just about every other year he was an average player. Ted Williams is on record as saying he wasn't a very good player, but he was better than Pete O'Brien, Drew Barrymore(WOW) and me. I don't know how good you are or were, I heard you were pretty good. I could hit a little but no power. Good lead-off guy.
Yas WAS extremely durable. I don't understand why you don't see what I am getting at. Yaz had the ability to play at an average level (you say above, certainly not great) and did for several years at the end of his career, reached some nice "milestones" (although not 500 HRs) then retired and waltzed into the HOF.
Walker, missed some (a lot?) of games during his peak (but what a peak!) and retired sooner than he could have. I don't think he got released. It would seem that the consensus here (since not a single person has chimed in for Larry) he missed too much time/had too short of a career to merit consideration for HOF.
If he in fact did have enough "left in the tank" to play 2-3 years, he might have put in enough time to overcome that criticism. The NUMBERS would indicate that he was declining even though he was able to play in more games in 2005 than 2004.
Sorry Larry I tried.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
Rice had a 128 Career OPS+ Murray had a 129 Career OPS+
On the surface, they look the same. However:
Rice was only able to produce at that rate for 9,058 career plate appearances. His OPS+ for his total of 9,058 career plate appearances was 128.
Eddie Murray was also able to play MLB for 9,058 career plate appearances. His OPS+ for his total of 9,058 career plate appearances was 140. For accuracy, that was really over 9,125 plate apperances(makes my cut off easier to compute).
Murray had Rice's career and he bested it by 10 OPS+ points. Murray had the better career.
But the story isn't over!
Murray went on to add 3,692 more plate appearances in MLB at a rate of 103 OPS+. It brought his lifetime OPS+ down, but he was still producing at slightly better than league average.
Rice was not good enough to hold a job in MLB to garner another 3,692 more plate appearances. His value at this point wasn't any different than mine or Drew Barrymore's.
So why on earth would anyone view Murray's extra 3,692 plate appearances as a negative, when Rice didn't have any value at all??
As for Yaz and Larry Walker, OPS+ is a decent stat to use, however, since OPS+ in the live ball era was easier to amass, it is kind of an unfair comparison if I line up their best years side by side.
However,
Lets look at how each truly fared among their peers.
We already know that Yaz also clearly had the dominant longer career, as if you did that exercise for every year of their career, Yaz will beat Walker every year and keep going while Walker will not be playing.
That is far more telling than what their lifetime OPS+ says(Walker 141, Yaz 130), isn't it??
PS, then when you consider that Walker missed a lot of time each year, it makes that VALUE gap even wider!
<< <i>Well, we can debate that Yaz and Killebrew and Mantle and a lot of guys played too long, or plaayed the exact right amount of time. I am not sure why Walker quit when he was still able to slug over .500 and OPS of .886. Comparing him to Yaz, Larry should have had 6 more years to accumulate some numbers. I read he had some neck problems. BTW Yaz only had maybe 4 superior years the other 19 were for the most part average, but better than me, or a retired Larry Walker. >>
For the last two years of his career Walker started less than half his teams games. At age 37 and 38 Yastrzemski started 90% of all games for the Red Sox. By that age Yastrzemski had already played in over 2700 games. The games Walker missed out on as a declining part time player in his 40s aren't why he falls so short of Yastrzemski. It's all the games he missed during his peak years
In the strike years he missed 11 and 13 games. In the other 12 years of his prime between age 24 and 36, he missed an average of 35 games. Yastrzemski was a top player a year earlier than Walker, at age 23, he remained a star a year longer, until age 37. And during those years he missed an average of 11 games per year.
Yastrzemski made 18 All-Star teams, even if he didn't deserve all of them, there is no way you could identify 14 of those years where a better outfielder was left off the team. There is no way a deserving All Star is average. He had maybe four years he was one of the very best players in the entire league. Of the other 19, the majority of the time he was still very good
Fred McGriff , should be a hall of famer . Consistency . McGriff was consistent with a solid average . He wasn't like Roger Maris or Hack Wilson . McGriff was near the end of his career by the time the steroid era happened. The guy would have 500 if not for the strike .
The Baseball Writers Freaking Morons . Fred McGriff deserves more than 21 to 23% of the vote . Willie Stargell got in easily with less homers and lower average and more years than McGriff . The only difference between McGriff and most of those guys is that he never won MVP . Dale Murphy won 2 MVPs and so did Juan Gonzalez .
The Baseball Writers should be stripped of their votes and let the fans and the Hall of Fame players decide. The Baseball writers are too stupid and self-righteous .
<< <i>The Baseball Writers should be stripped of their votes and let the fans and the Hall of Fame players decide. The Baseball writers are too stupid and self-righteous . >>
Its stupid to let writers vote in the first place. Should be just the veterans committee.
<< <i>The Baseball Writers Freaking Morons . Fred McGriff deserves more than 21 to 23% of the vote . Willie Stargell got in easily with less homers and lower average and more years than McGriff . The only difference between McGriff and most of those guys is that he never won MVP . Dale Murphy won 2 MVPs and so did Juan Gonzalez . >>
Willie Stargell hardly played his last 3 seasons. One was a strike year. You have to compare the era's. Willie hit more home runs than any other player in the 70's.
Comments
Yas WAS extremely durable. I don't understand why you don't see what I am getting at. Yaz had the ability to play at an average level (you say above, certainly not great) and did for several years at the end of his career, reached some nice "milestones" (although not 500 HRs) then retired and waltzed into the HOF.
Walker, missed some (a lot?) of games during his peak (but what a peak!) and retired sooner than he could have. I don't think he got released. It would seem that the consensus here (since not a single person has chimed in for Larry) he missed too much time/had too short of a career to merit consideration for HOF.
If he in fact did have enough "left in the tank" to play 2-3 years, he might have put in enough time to overcome that criticism. The NUMBERS would indicate that he was declining even though he was able to play in more games in 2005 than 2004.
Sorry Larry I tried.
Rice had a 128 Career OPS+
Murray had a 129 Career OPS+
On the surface, they look the same. However:
Rice was only able to produce at that rate for 9,058 career plate appearances. His OPS+ for his total of 9,058 career plate appearances was 128.
Eddie Murray was also able to play MLB for 9,058 career plate appearances. His OPS+ for his total of 9,058 career plate appearances was 140. For accuracy, that was really over 9,125 plate apperances(makes my cut off easier to compute).
Murray had Rice's career and he bested it by 10 OPS+ points. Murray had the better career.
But the story isn't over!
Murray went on to add 3,692 more plate appearances in MLB at a rate of 103 OPS+. It brought his lifetime OPS+ down, but he was still producing at slightly better than league average.
Rice was not good enough to hold a job in MLB to garner another 3,692 more plate appearances. His value at this point wasn't any different than mine or Drew Barrymore's.
So why on earth would anyone view Murray's extra 3,692 plate appearances as a negative, when Rice didn't have any value at all??
Murray was better than Rice.
However,
Lets look at how each truly fared among their peers.
Here are their best league finishes in OPS+.
Yaz........1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 7th, 9th, 9th.
Walker...2nd, 3rd, 6th, 6th, 7th, 10th, 10th
Yaz clearly had the more dominant peak!!
We already know that Yaz also clearly had the dominant longer career, as if you did that exercise for every year of their career, Yaz will beat Walker every year and keep going while Walker will not be playing.
That is far more telling than what their lifetime OPS+ says(Walker 141, Yaz 130), isn't it??
PS, then when you consider that Walker missed a lot of time each year, it makes that VALUE gap even wider!
<< <i>Well, we can debate that Yaz and Killebrew and Mantle and a lot of guys played too long, or plaayed the exact right amount of time. I am not sure why Walker quit when he was still able to slug over .500 and OPS of .886. Comparing him to Yaz, Larry should have had 6 more years to accumulate some numbers. I read he had some neck problems. BTW Yaz only had maybe 4 superior years the other 19 were for the most part average, but better than me, or a retired Larry Walker.
>>
For the last two years of his career Walker started less than half his teams games. At age 37 and 38 Yastrzemski started 90% of all games for the Red Sox. By that age Yastrzemski had already played in over 2700 games. The games Walker missed out on as a declining part time player in his 40s aren't why he falls so short of Yastrzemski. It's all the games he missed during his peak years
In the strike years he missed 11 and 13 games. In the other 12 years of his prime between age 24 and 36, he missed an average of 35 games. Yastrzemski was a top player a year earlier than Walker, at age 23, he remained a star a year longer, until age 37. And during those years he missed an average of 11 games per year.
Yastrzemski made 18 All-Star teams, even if he didn't deserve all of them, there is no way you could identify 14 of those years where a better outfielder was left off the team. There is no way a deserving All Star is average. He had maybe four years he was one of the very best players in the entire league. Of the other 19, the majority of the time he was still very good
<< <i>The Baseball Writers should be stripped of their votes and let the fans and the Hall of Fame players decide. The Baseball writers are too stupid and self-righteous . >>
Its stupid to let writers vote in the first place. Should be just the veterans committee.
<< <i>The Baseball Writers Freaking Morons . Fred McGriff deserves more than 21 to 23% of the vote . Willie Stargell got in easily with less homers and lower average and more years than McGriff . The only difference between McGriff and most of those guys is that he never won MVP . Dale Murphy won 2 MVPs and so did Juan Gonzalez . >>
Willie Stargell hardly played his last 3 seasons. One was a strike year. You have to compare the era's. Willie hit more home runs than any other player in the 70's.